You Need To Read This!!

[Gav-n-Tn]

Apparently, all of this time I thought our personal information was protected and no list of sales was kept by the Government when we purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer as outlined in the Gun Control Act of 1968, which specifically forbids the establishment of a centralized Federal gun registry. Well, I'm either misunderstanding what I'm reading -I think not- or I've been misled on how the whole "system" works for a while now.

Now I think I know why there's such a push to use the "Gun Show Loophole" phrase to scare politicians into creating more laws to track firearms.

Quote:

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset" class=alt2>ATF publicized global access in United Nations Disarmament Marking and Tracing Workshops held in Nairobi, Kenya in December, 2007, Lomé, Togo in April, 2008, Rio de Janeiro in June, 2008, and other locations. ATF reports over 2,000 agencies around the world and over 10,000 individuals have access to American gun owner personal information. Tracing data is of no value without identifying the individual purchaser (name & address), so ATF specifically provides "a description of the original retail purchaser" to the requestor. In GAO Report 09-709, ATF reports the National Tracing Center, “conducts the gun traces, and returns information on their findings to the submitting partyâ€.

Countries formally provided with eTrace software and access to American gun owner names and addresses include:

<SUP></SUP>

1. Mexico, 2. Colombia, 3. Suriname, 4. Tobago, 5. Guyana, 6. Canada, 7. Germany, 8. Bahamas, 9. Jamaica, 10. Dominican Republic, 11. Barbados, 12. Anguilla, 13. Antigua, 14. Barbuda, 15. Aruba, 16. Curacao, 17. Dominica, 18. Grenada, 19. St Vincent, 20. Grenadines 21. St. Lucia, 22. Belize, 23. Costa Rica, 24. El Salvador, 25. Guatemala, 26. Panama, 27. St. Kitts, 28. Nevis, 29. several Caribbean police forces, 30. Britain, 31. Australia, 32. Japan.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<SUP></SUP>

If Wikipedia's definition/information is wrong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETrace, no one has refuted it.

Take time to read this too. This is where I first saw the reference to the eTrace system while reading about the Mexican-American "gun problem". Apparently our Government has no issue at all with letting KNOWN corrupt governments like Mexico -OR ANY FOREIGN G'MENT FOR THAT MATTER- have Federally OK'd access to our names and addresses via eTrace as outlined in this GAO document. By the way, the original document was missing but I found an archived copy of it here: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:sha7kDhaJIYJ:http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09709.pdf#64

Here's an article about Belgium being onboard: http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2010/03/robert-farago/atf-etrace-jpf/

Edited September 6, 2010 by Gav-n-Tn

[Guest oldsmobile98]

It's kind of like when they tell you your census information is confidential.

The most recent examples occurred in 2002 and 2003, when the Census Bureau turned over information it had collected about Arab-Americans to Homeland Security.

Data from the 1940 Census was used to intern Japanese, Italian, and German Americans following the U.S.’s entry into the war, and to monitor and persecute others who escaped internment. In addition to providing geographic information to the War Department, the Census Bureau released the name, address, age, sex, citizenship status and occupation of Japanese Americans in the Washington, D.C., area to the Treasury Department in response to an unspecified threat against President Franklin Roosevelt in 1943.

Those who run the nanny state HATE privacy. Well, your privacy. They like theirs.

[Guest bkelm18]

Because when I think of accurate news sources, I think of Wikipedia.

[Gav-n-Tn]

Because when I think of accurate news sources, I think of Wikipedia.

Did you read the whole thing? The GAO article states very clearly that Mexico is trained to use and has access to eTrace. If you go to the ATF's eTrace site it even says who has access and that includes other Governments. Gimme a break. Don't dismiss it because Wikipedia is one of the sources. Better yet, if you have anything that refutes it, post it. I'd like to hear it. Edited September 6, 2010 by Gav-n-Tn

[Desert Rat]

I always thought that was common knowledge. With the serial number and make of gun the latest retail purchaser can be traced. With the quality control in place chances are the indormation is years out of date and probably has a 10% or better error margin.

Close enough for Government work!

[Guest bkelm18]

Did you read the whole thing? The GAO article states very clearly that Mexico is trained to use and has access to eTrace. If you go to the ATF's eTrace site it even says who has access and that includes other Governments. Gimme a break. Don't dismiss it because Wikipedia is one of the sources. Better yet, if you have anything that refutes it, post it. I'd like to hear it.

Show me any documentation or proof from a credible source that this is indeed a national firearm registry. There is a difference in a localized source of info for tracing firearms and a registry of every firearm in the country. LEO's/ATF have always had the ability to trace firearms to the dealer level and to the person who purchased it from the dealer.

Edited September 6, 2010 by bkelm18

[Gav-n-Tn]

Show me any documentation or proof from a credible source that this is indeed a national firearm registry. There is a difference in a localized source of info for tracing firearms and a registry of every firearm in the country. LEO's/ATF have always had the ability to trace firearms to the dealer level and to the person who purchased it from the dealer.

You may have a point about whether or not it qualifies as a registry or not by definition -I'll concede that- but why should other countries have access to the info?

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

Show me any documentation or proof from a credible source that this is indeed a national firearm registry. There is a difference in a localized source of info for tracing firearms and a registry of every firearm in the country. LEO's/ATF have always had the ability to trace firearms to the dealer level and to the person who purchased it from the dealer.

If you're looking for proof that there's some big, perfectly annotated and indexed list of every gun and every gun owner in the country, you're not going to find it. Of course, the government doesn't need such a list. In fact, I doubt they'd want it. Such a list would cause them a great many problems as it would bring their unlawful behavior to light. They prefer to use more hidden, diffuse, and obscure methods.

BATF Backdoor Firearms Registration Scheme

Do you seriously just not believe the government has compiled tremendous amounts of data that they may use at will, including 4473 information?

Edited September 6, 2010 by Abominable_Hillbilly

[mikegideon]

I grabbed this out of the Wiki article. "ATF specifically provides "a description of the original retail purchaser" to the requestor". I have tried to believe they just throw that data away, but wouldn't bet money on it.

If this is true, it's not quite the same as a full blown gun registry. Doesn't even bother me that much that it exists, except for the government lying their asses off (again).

[midtennchip]

As I understand it, eTrace does two things. It allows participating agencies (including some foreign goverments) to

1. submit gun trace requests; and

2. view previous traces.

eTrace: Internet-based Firearms Tracing and Analysis

As I understand it, this is not a huge database of all firearm owners. Just information on guns that have actually been traced.

[mikegideon]

You may have a point about whether or not it qualifies as a registry or not by definition -I'll concede that- but why should other countries have access to the info?

I'm not worried about other countries. I'm worried about this one

[Gav-n-Tn]

Hillbilly, the thing that bothers me the most is the fact that foreign Governments have access to it. I was told that after the background check was done and the gun was yours, by law, the records had to be purged by the end of the day. I know there is a record in every FFL's log book.

[Gav-n-Tn]

I grabbed this out of the Wiki article. "ATF specifically provides "a description of the original retail purchaser" to the requestor". I have tried to believe they just throw that data away, but wouldn't bet money on it.

If this is true, it's not quite the same as a full blown gun registry. Doesn't even bother me that much that it exists, except for the government lying their asses off (again).

It might not be the same as a centralized registry but it wouldn't take much to pull the info together and compile it. I've never even thought twice about buying one, the 4473, background check, etc. or I wouldn't have done it so many times.

Apparently, they think I'm alright enough to own one. To me, it's the principal here.

I'll make this clear: I'm not a fearmonger, anti-gov type, cospiracy theorist, etc. either. I just felt like this should be shared with other gun owners.

Edited September 6, 2010 by Gav-n-Tn

[mikegideon]

Not the same as a registry, because they can't track the gun past the original owner.

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

Not the same as a registry, because they can't track the gun past the original owner.

That really doesn't make me feel any better, though.

[Guest bkelm18]

That really doesn't make me feel any better, though.

They've more or less always been able to do that since the GCA. If you don't like it, you can always buy used.

[mikegideon]

That really doesn't make me feel any better, though.

No, but I lived under the assumption that they could for over 30 years anyway. I don't mind so much that they can trace it to the FFL. Since I'm a law abiding guy, I don't mind if LE has some tools. On the other hand, gun registration would make me fighting mad.

[dunndw]

[Guest Abominable_Hillbilly]

They've more or less always been able to do that since the GCA. If you don't like it, you can always buy used.

Yeah. I know I can buy used. Unfortunately, that doesn't absolve the government of any wrongdoing, real or imagined.

And that's the point.

No, but I lived under the assumption that they could for over 30 years anyway. I don't mind so much that they can trace it to the FFL. Since I'm a law abiding guy, I don't mind if LE has some tools. On the other hand, gun registration would make me fighting mad.

You're considered to be law-abiding now. What about at some point in the future?

[Gav-n-Tn]

Since I'm a law abiding guy, I don't mind if LE has some tools.

The WORLD'S LEOs? or America's LEOs. I see Mexico having access to gun owner info as a VERY bad deal along with any other foreign government. They're so crooked they can't even trust eachother down there. I guess anyone that wants to think it's alright can but I don't.

[Guest 270win]

Buying/selling privately avoids this problem. The 4473 only goes to who originally bought the firearm from the dealer. They are not that great at truly tracing where it goes if it is sold or given to a private party as long as it is not involved in a crime or reported stolen. After that, the gun can be sold to your buddy or cousin or given to your friend as a gift with no record keeping. Guns change hands so many times it isn't funny. People move. We do have the 5th Amendment. About every house in America has a gun. No one knows truly what is in each house because, except in a few states, the guns aren't registered and are sold/given/bought. To know would be a nightmare.

[Gav-n-Tn]

Well, I now know for a hard fact that this event really happened. I heard from a friend of a friend and couldn't believe it when I first heard it. Matter of fact, I didn't believe it at all. I figured that he had misunderstood......... until I finally spoke directly -this very morning- to the guy that it happened to.

Here goes:

He was in Detroit. While there, they decided to ride over into Canada. When they passed through Canadian customs, the agent asked if they had any guns, contraband, blah blah blah as you would expect. The agent ran his driver's license. The Canadian agent then began to ask him "Do you still own this (gun)? Do you still own this (gun)? Do you still own this (gun)? until he had asked him about every gun that was in the system. He told me that some of them he could barely remember until the Customs agent aked about them. The whole thing kind of blew his mind.

Now, what did that have to do with visiting Canada? It's not like he was on a hunting trip. For those of you who say that eTrace is only used if there's a crime, what's your answer to this? As I said, he wasn't even the one that told me about it originally. Anyone have an answer ????

<!-- / message --><!-- attachments --><!-- / attachments --><!-- sig -->

[Desert Rat]

When I lived in Nevada they knew every handgun I owned because Nevada registers handguns. If you live in a state that does register then it is possible the information will be there but as your example showed the weapons were not removed from the records when the guns were disposed of.

As far as visiting Canada you can not take a weapon into Canada. I was thinking of traveling through Canada after I retired so I sold what guns I had at the time as I was going to be living out of an RV. State laws and Canada laws convinced me not to have long guns or handguns in my vehicle unless I was willing to part with them. As has already been mentioned Buy at a Gun Show or from an individual and the transaction is not recorded anywhere. The down side is you have no guarantee the weapon is not on a hot sheet somewhere. Talking to my LGS that has a store in Kentucky also he advised that a lot of the weapons he takes in trade at that store are found on a hot sheet if he transfers them and sells them in Tennessee because Kentucky does not do a check on the weapon. If you do buy a weapon that is on the sheet for whatever reason you stand to have it confiscated if you do a trade in. I watched as a person was not allowed to retrieve his weapon from a gun store after having the gun fixed because they had to do a check for whatever reason and it came back negative.

[Gav-n-Tn]

I guess I should have made it clearer; He did not have any guns on him and told them so when asked. They STILL asked him about all of the ones they had listed. Mind you, I'm sure the ones they asked about were all first-time-purchase store guns. Obviously they wouldn't know about any others. As to your other point: Fortunately, Tennessee does do one of the most -if not the most- thorough checks when a gun is transferred. They (TBI) do a stolen gun check as well as a background check. I like that. I wouldn't want anyone's stolen gun.

Edited September 11, 2010 by Gav-n-Tn

[Desert Rat]

I understood what you were saying and was adding to it. The fact the data base has obsolete information is a good thing as that overloads the system and the users of the information doubt its accuracy. If questioned you only need answer the weapon was sold or misplaced long ago. Better yet you can truthfully say I do not recall what became of it! I do not recall where I left my keys this morning or the last time I saw them. What keys?!!!

Your comments reminded me of past experiences regarding this issue.