search
top

E-Trace by ATF

Joe Huffman thinks it might be violating the law.  Depends on the details, but based on what we know, here is the law:

“(i) Prohibition Relating To Establishment of Registration Systems With Respect to Firearms.—No department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States may—
“(1) require that any record or portion thereof generated by the system established under this section be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or political subdivision thereof; or
“(2) use the system established under this section to establish any system for the registration of firearms, firearm owners, or firearm transactions or dispositions, except with respect to persons, prohibited by section 922 (g) or (n) of title 18, United States Code, or State law, from receiving a firearm.
This is in the part of the law that establishes the National Instant Check System.  What ATF wll probably argue is that since they aren’t compiling NICS data, but just distributor A&D records, that it doesn’t constitute a registry under this section of the law.  Why is that not entirely comforting?

12 Responses to “E-Trace by ATF”

  1. Joe Huffman says:

    I’m not particularily annoyed with the distributor records. It’s the computerization of the state records of individual sales.

  2. Sebastian says:

    That essentially means ATF has a record of all my pistols, through Pennsylvania’s registration system for handguns, which was supposed to have been illegal, but the Supreme Court said it’s just a record of sale, so it’s OK.

  3. Alan says:

    It’s pretty obvious that they’re trying to back door a registration system.

  4. Sebastian says:

    It’s been a consistent problem for the past two decades. One of the big problems with computerizing gun sale records.

  5. Joe Huffman says:

    Sebastian, It depends on whether PA is cooperating with the ATF or not.

    Alan, That is the way it appears to me. I’ve sent email to four lawyers I know that specialize in gun laws to get their opinions. Nothing back yet but it was late last night when I sent the email.

  6. Sebastian says:

    Hmm… I wonder if they are. If they are that could be news.

  7. Tom says:

    so much for burning those 4473s.

  8. Sebastian says:

    The other problem is that ATF already has a lot of 4473 from dealers that have gone defunct. We kind of lost the registration battle in 1968. We’d like to think we don’t have registration, but really we do. The only thing preventing a fairly complete computerized system at this point are legal barriers.

  9. RAH says:

    And that is why the want to enact the ban on ”gun show loophole” Private sales are the only guns that have no or less paper. Police will have to track each purchaser and find out where that person sold the gun.

    The only other guns with no paper are guns purchased prior to 1968 and have been given, willed or sold privately.

  10. RAH says:

    Remeber that the lack of registry hamp[ers the BATF

  11. RAH says:

    OOPS I meant that the states can have data bases with gun prurchasers since state law applies to purchases also. So the states have a registry of sorts also.

  12. Jdude says:

    Is there a way to get standing to sue over the background check system and crush it once and for all? We will have registration as long as that and the 4473 is in place.

top