Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Max White]

In the US at least, it is completely forbidden to have any electronic database of firearms registries. IIRC it is also illegal for a central repository of paper records to exist either.  This is a result of NRA screaming bloody murder that such tracking is the first step to rounding everyone with a gun up and confiscating them/executing owners for not being communists.

I don't... I don't understand what the point of having a gun licence even is then. If it isn't backed by an official record, it is worthless. Totally worthless. You are just getting hold of a piece of laminated paper that looks nice in your wallet. Licenses are part of a larger system, but they took away the rest of the system...

[Montague]

The US doesn't have centralised gun ownership records is because it is an impossible task. Too many guns, too many people, too many types, varieties, uses, herilooms, antiques and ect, ect it would be literally impossible to track every single firearm and every single transaction and every single potential person that might have access to one. Canada's system has cost a fortune and has still failed and it's a country with only 10% the population of the USA. To try something like that in the US, with 330 million people with about half of them owning weapons, is not a rational idea.

Instead, the US has centralized databanks on individuals that is consulted before selling a person a gun.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

In the US at least, it is completely forbidden to have any electronic database of firearms registries. IIRC it is also illegal for a central repository of paper records to exist either.  This is a result of NRA screaming bloody murder that such tracking is the first step to rounding everyone with a gun up and confiscating them/executing owners for not being communists.

I don't... I don't understand what the point of having a gun licence even is then. If it isn't backed by an official record, it is worthless. Totally worthless. You are just getting hold of a piece of laminated paper that looks nice in your wallet. Licenses are part of a larger system, but they took away the rest of the system...

If you get involved in a crime, they automatically check (manually) all of your gun licenses (if required in that state). If you don't have them, then you get charged with unlicensed possession in addition to whatever crime was committed. This can be a very bad thing for you in court, and/or if you murdered someone.

In general, people in the US oppose national databases of people, cause notwithstanding. I recall that there was some desire to see the US Census reduced to just counting the number of people in the nation back in 2010, when it was last issued.

Oh, and it is worth noting that the National Rifle Association is by far the largest lobbying group in the US.

[scriver]

That is so fucked up.

[Max White]

Instead, the US has centralized databanks on individuals that is consulted before selling a person a gun.

I'm not talking about a gun register, I am talking about a gun owners register. It is already done for car licenses, and more people drive a car than own a gun. You don't get a license for each gun you own, instead you register it separately, thus a database on gun ownership is what you are describing here. They could have easily consulted this database to see if this person was allowed to own a gun.

[Nadaka]

Instead, the US has centralized databanks on individuals that is consulted before selling a person a gun.

I'm not talking about a gun register, I am talking about a gun owners register. It is already done for car licenses, and more people drive a car than own a gun. You don't get a license for each gun you own, instead you register it separately, thus a database on gun ownership is what you are describing here. They could have easily consulted this database to see if this person was allowed to own a gun.

And like I said, the NRA (the principal defender of the 2nd amendment in the US) does not support and very actively campaigns against centralized registration records. It is one of the things I do not really agree with them on.

Red King can give a better picture of it than I can, but firearm registrations are stored local to the place of purchase of the firearm.

[Tellemurius]

Instead, the US has centralized databanks on individuals that is consulted before selling a person a gun.

I'm not talking about a gun register, I am talking about a gun owners register. It is already done for car licenses, and more people drive a car than own a gun. You don't get a license for each gun you own, instead you register it separately, thus a database on gun ownership is what you are describing here. They could have easily consulted this database to see if this person was allowed to own a gun.

well Max when you register/purchase a gun in US, its serial number is recorded to the owner.

[Max White]

So... How do they keep track of this long list of serial numbers and owners, if they aren't allowed any record of gun owners?

[Nadaka]

So... How do they keep track of this long list of serial numbers and owners, if they aren't allowed any record of gun owners?

File cards in the back of gun stores or local police stations. If you are lucky, they are in alphabetical order and only take a few hours to search through by hand at each of hundreds or thousands of locations.

[Tellemurius]

So... How do they keep track of this long list of serial numbers and owners, if they aren't allowed any record of gun owners?

File cards in the back of gun stores. If you are lucky, they are in alphabetical order and only take a few hours to search through by hand at each of hundreds or thousands of locations.

Firearms Tracing with Registration Scheme #1

These forms and records are used by law enforcement agencies to trace firearms associated with crime. To initiate a firearm trace, the police must note the serial number of the gun, then forward a firearm trace request (Form 3312.1) with other pertinent information to the ATF. The ATF then contacts the manufacturer who identifies the wholesaler that bought the firearm. The wholesaler then refers the ATF to the retail dealer who, using the bound-book, identifies the original retail purchaser.

The ATF considers a trace successful if the original purchaser is identified. Normally at this point, the ATF turns the case over to local law enforcement, however in rare cases the ATF attempts to follow the chain of possession. To trace a gun beyond the first retail purchaser, law enforcement authorities must conduct interviews and use informants, and of course these methods are often unsuccessful.

It averages 11.4 days to trace a firearm to the first retail purchaser. The ATF has developed a computer system that reduces trace time to an average of five days. Participation is voluntary, and it is anticipated the number of licensees participating will increase. (ATF, Commerce in Firearms in the United States, February 2000, p. 20)

The same ATF publication (p. 25) says, "Approximately 200,000 trace requests were received in 1999...A firearms trace currently identifies the first retail dealer for approximately 60 percent of trace requests and the first retail purchaser for approximately 40 percent of trace requests." (The report lists the reasons why many traces fail.)

However, ATF trace requests are not necessarily representative of crime guns or gun traces:

"One reason that few [violent crime] guns are traced is that information about the chain of custody from manufacturer to retail sale is often not necessary for prosecution of state and local gun crimes. After all, a District Attorney bringing an armed robbery case needs to prove that the defendant used a gun, not that the defendant used a gun with a particular pedigree. In some cases, local police may find it faster to conduct a trace themselves than to ask BATF to perform the trace.
"Further, some jurisdictions-such as New York, Maryland, California, New Jersey, and Massachusetts-keep detailed records of all legal ownership of handguns, or of all guns. These jurisdictions would logically use their own records first for gun tracing, and would turn to BATF only when their own data failed." (Kopel, David B. Tracing Misinformation: How Anti-gun Activists Misuse BATF Data, 1998)

[Montague]

Instead, the US has centralized databanks on individuals that is consulted before selling a person a gun.

I'm not talking about a gun register, I am talking about a gun owners register. It is already done for car licenses, and more people drive a car than own a gun. You don't get a license for each gun you own, instead you register it separately, thus a database on gun ownership is what you are describing here. They could have easily consulted this database to see if this person was allowed to own a gun.

Frankly, this isn't an unreasonable idea. The problem with this in the US is that it would be grossy abused beyond it's stated intent. There really is no such thing as a good will compromise between gun control advocates and gun owners because the former or latter will stretch a law to it's limits. It's an all-or-nothing wedge issue.

It's a matter of politics. If something like you described was implimented, the gun control advocates would abuse it at every opportunity to deny people access to firearms and not enforce it to the spirit of the law.

So... How do they keep track of this long list of serial numbers and owners, if they aren't allowed any record of gun owners?

The retailers keep records of the transaction. They keep the information on the purchaser, serial numbers of the weapon and they keep the records within that company that sold the weapon. This is for liability/ investigation reasons. If a weapon ends up stolen or used in a crime, they can track that down to the store that sold it to find the identity of the original purchaser, at least.

These records are not public, they belong to the company selling the weapon and can only be disclosed in circumstances such as criminal investigations and whatnot.

[Max White]

So your system is beyond fucked because some gun nutters are paranoid to levels unknown to normal human kind... Welp, there is nothing that can be done to salvage the situation. I suggest we build a great big wall around your country and tell them it is to 'keep dem darn immagants out!' then we evacuate everybody who pronounces America with the 'A' at the beginning.

It is the only way.

[Tellemurius]

So your system is beyond fucked because some gun nutters are paranoid to levels unknown to normal human kind... Welp, there is nothing that can be done to salvage the situation. I suggest we build a great big wall around your country and tell them it is to 'keep dem darn immagants out!' then we evacuate everybody who pronounces America with the 'A' at the beginning.

It is the only way.

Why do we need to have a license anyways, we have a BACKGROUND CHECK done on us everytime we buy one of the damn things. Its amazing what the FBI keeps on records for the people.

[scriver]

So... How do they keep track of this long list of serial numbers and owners, if they aren't allowed any record of gun owners?

File cards in the back of gun stores or local police stations. If you are lucky, they are in alphabetical order and only take a few hours to search through by hand at each of hundreds or thousands of locations.

So to save money, they made the system as worthless and inefficient as possible?

...Makes sense.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

So your system is beyond fucked because some gun nutters are paranoid to levels unknown to normal human kind... Welp, there is nothing that can be done to salvage the situation. I suggest we build a great big wall around your country and tell them it is to 'keep dem darn immagants out!' then we evacuate everybody who pronounces America with the 'A' at the beginning.

It is the only way.

Max, this isn't a paranoid idea in the US. It's perfectly mainstream, and most people are fine with how the system is. It doesn't really need to be changed.