Category Archives: Gun Rights

Herding cats?

Posted on by

I would like to think Howard Nemerov will have better luck with this than the NRA, GOA, and others do:



I am building a national network to ensure the survival of our civil right of self-defense. Our mission is to contact our congressional representatives at least once a month with a short fact-bite explaining why this civil right is so vital to the preservation of all other rights, as well as the survival of our nation as the international torch-bearer of Liberty.


Initially, we will create and support a minimum of 20,000 activists in each state. One million people contacting their representatives each month will make even the most rabid anti-rights advocate hesitate, because they know that each of you represents an even larger number of votes, and getting re-elected is the goal of most representatives: of the 435 seats in Congress in 2008, 400 incumbents were running for re-election (92% of all available seats).


You will receive a sample talking point each month, or you can say whatever you think will make the best point with your representative.


I tried doing something on a much, much smaller scale and was very disappointed. I had about 15 people on an email list that were “very committed” to the gun rights issue and agreed to help influence the Washington State legislature on the gun issue. I sent out about a half dozen different requests for them to contact their representatives over the course of about a year. I later asked them in person if they had responded as I had requested. There were only about 10 TOTAL contacts that resulted from my requests.


My conclusion was liberty minded people are not easily herded like sheep. That they value their liberty may also mean they will not be easily persuaded to do as someone else asks.


As others have said, it’s like herding cats.


Hence, my conclusion is that Mr. Nemerov had better have some trick up his sleeve that many others have failed to figure out and/or execute successfully on.

Burning the midnight oil

Posted on by

An ATF agent gets arrested for murder and apparently the DOJ starts burning the midnight oil over it. Local time for this Google search by them was nearly 12:30 AM:




























































































Domain Name   usdoj.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address   149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice)
ISP   US Dept of Justice
Location  

























Continent  :  North America
Country  :  United States  (Facts)
State  :  District of Columbia
City  :  Washington
Lat/Long  :  38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
Distance  :  2,071 miles
Language   English (U.S.)
en-us
Operating System   Microsoft WinXP
Browser   Internet Explorer 6.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; DOJ3jx7bf; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.648; .NET CLR 3.5.21022)
Javascript   version 1.3
Monitor  









Resolution  :  1024 x 768
Color Depth  :  32 bits
Time of Visit   Jan 8 2009 9:27:55 pm
Last Page View   Jan 8 2009 9:29:10 pm
Visit Length   1 minute 15 seconds
Page Views   2
Referring URL http://www.google.co…rk january 7%2C 2008
Search Engine google.com
Search Words atf agent arrested william clark january 7, 2008
Visit Entry Page   http://blog.joehuffm…astItIsAnArrest.aspx
Visit Exit Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/
Out Click    
Time Zone   UTC-5:00
Visitor’s Time   Jan 9 2009 12:27:55 am
Visit Number   416,532


I also received a similar search hit this morning.


It’s nice to know they care about what I think. But what I really wish is they would just go get legimate jobs instead of spending taxpayer money to infringe our rights.

At least it is an arrest

Posted on by

To my way of thinking nearly all ATF agents should be arrested for violation of 18 USC 242. But I don’t expect that to happen for at least another, like, million years or so. But there is one less ATF agent in the field today which has to be a good thing:



A U.S. federal agent has been charged with second-degree murder in the alleged 2008 shooting of his neighbor in the U.S. Virgin Islands.


Justice officials say they arrested Agent William Clark with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. He also was charged with involuntary manslaughter and using a dangerous weapon during a violent crime.

Quote of the day–William P. Hoar

Posted on by

While Barack Obama has been urging citizens not to stock up on weapons because they mistrust him, other anti-gunners are a tad more candid, seeing in the new administration an opportunity to disarm Americans. The Brady Campaign, the day after the election, was demanding the adoption of what it duplicitously calls “common sense gun laws.” Similarly, John Rosenthal, co-founder of Stop Handgun Violence, gleefully wrote in the Boston Globe: “With the historic election of Barack Obama, the nation finally has an opportunity to enact sensible national gun control policy.”

Not so. We already have such a “policy.” It is called the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.


William P. Hoar
January 7, 2008
Skepticism About Second Amendment Support
[There have been lots of people that have used various versions of that last paragraph but that doesn’t diminish the correctness or the effectiveness of it.–Joe]

War plans

Posted on by

If there is a coming offensive against gun owners Alan Korwin has some of the likely details of their war plans. There is some scary stuff in there:



Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.” Note that Obama’s pick for this office (Eric Holder, confirmation hearing set for Jan. 15) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home.


In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.”


In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.


..


If these near-total bans aren’t enough, the most dangerous part may be the phrase “pistol grip” because: “The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” In other words, any semi-auto long gun with a grip (that’s ALL semi-auto long guns) would be banned under the existing proposal. It’s not clear what they hope to achieve by deceptively banning guns with grips instead of just calling to ban the guns — even an idjit can tell it’s the same thing.


I didn’t cover here all the magazine bans, transfer bans, dealer record-keeping and centralized reporting, and a host of nuisance details — there will be time enough for that when the new lists are released soon: “As soon as President-elect Obama is inaugurated and the 111th Congress is sworn in,” according to Ms. Brady. Congress is set to be sworn in on Jan. 6, Inauguration Day is Jan. 20.


If they really are making war plans to engage us then we need to make our plans and prepare as well. I’m still debating what to work on first.

Gathering the troops?

Posted on by

I could just be parnoid but this search for Mothers Against Violence In America founder Pam Eakes (I last met and did battle with her nine years ago) by someone in the U.S. House of Representatives could be someone looking for support in a coming offensive:




























































































Domain Name   house.gov ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address   143.231.249.# (Information Systems, U.S. House of Representatives)
ISP   Information Systems, U.S. House of Representatives
Location  

























Continent  :  North America
Country  :  United States  (Facts)
State  :  District of Columbia
City  :  Washington
Lat/Long  :  38.9097, -77.0231 (Map)
Distance  :  2,071 miles
Language   English (U.S.)
en-us
Operating System   Microsoft WinXP
Browser   Internet Explorer 7.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; InfoPath.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30)
Javascript   version 1.3
Monitor  









Resolution  :  1280 x 1024
Color Depth  :  32 bits
Time of Visit   Jan 6 2009 5:49:37 am
Last Page View   Jan 6 2009 5:49:37 am
Visit Length   0 seconds
Page Views   1
Referring URL http://www.google.co…ence pam eakes email
Search Engine google.com
Search Words mavia mothers against violence pam eakes email
Visit Entry Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/2006/06/
Visit Exit Page   https://blog.joehuffman.org/2006/06/
Out Click    
Time Zone   UTC-5:00
Visitor’s Time   Jan 6 2009 8:49:37 am
Visit Number   414,892

Quote of the day–Michael Gaddy

Posted on by

Americans are purchasing firearms and ammunition in record numbers, not because they believe 2009 will offer unusually good duck hunting, but because they fear the fallout from the coming economic storm and the state’s reaction to that fallout.


Michael Gaddy
Buy, Buy, Buy
January 5, 2008
[H/T to Say Uncle for the pointer. There will be more QOTDs from this piece over the next few weeks and months.–Joe]

Carry in Post Offices

Posted on by

Robb posted about being irked that he can’t legally carry his firearm into a Post Office. He can carry at the hospital, shopping malls, his kids soccer games and virtually all public places. What is so special about a Post Office that he is disallowed from carrying their? Of course the answer is there is nothing special about the Post Office that should be grounds for disallowing the carrying defensive tools while picking up your mail. Just as prohibiting blacks from public swimming pools and using the same water fountains as others had no basis other than the bigotry of those making the rules. Still, spending time in a Federal prison isn’t my favorite way of standing by my principles.


That said I had looked into the guns in Post Offices before and had heard others talk of the law being somewhat ambigous. With that background I was going to point out to Robb that according to 18 USC 930, which I’m fairly certain is what I have seen posted on Post Office doors, there are exemptions to the part about fines and imprisonment for “whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility”. These exemptions are never posted on the wall of the post office:



(d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to—



(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;


(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law; or


(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.


Notice the last three words of (d)(3), “other lawful purpose”. Self defense–isn’t that a lawful purpose?


But as I was doing my research on the topic, just to make sure, I ran across this post from a lawyer which says that 18 USC 930 isn’t the controlling law. 39 USC 410 says (emphasis added):



(a) Except as provided by subsection (b) of this section, and except as otherwise provided in this title or insofar as such laws remain in force as rules or regulations of the Postal Service, no Federal law dealing with public or Federal contracts, property, works, officers, employees, budgets, or funds, including the provisions of chapters 5 and 7 of title 5, shall apply to the exercise of the powers of the Postal Service.


(b) The following provisions shall apply to the Postal Service:



(1) section 552 (public information), section 552a (records about individuals), section 552b (open meetings), section 3102 (employment of personal assistants for blind, deaf, or otherwise handicapped employees), section 3110 (restrictions on employment of relatives), section 3333 and chapters 72 (antidiscrimination; right to petition Congress) and 73 (suitability, security, and conduct of employees), section 5520 (withholding city income or employment taxes), and section 5532 (!1) (dual pay) of title 5, except that no regulation issued under such chapters or section shall apply to the Postal Service unless expressly made applicable;


In the Postal rules I found that bringing a firearm onto the property is a rule violation but apparently it is not a felony:



  (l) Weapons and explosives. No person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.


…


  (p) Penalties and other law. (1) Alleged violations of these rules and regulations are heard, and the penalties prescribed herein are imposed, either in a Federal district court or by a Federal magistrate in accordance with applicable court rules. Questions regarding such rules should be directed to the regional counsel for the region involved.
(2) Whoever shall be found guilty of violating the rules and regulations in this section while on property under the charge and control of the Postal Service is subject to fine of not more than $50 or imprisonment of not more than 30 days, or both.


Further reading of the rules revealed you give up your Fourth Amendment rights once you set foot on U.S. Postal Property (232.1 (b)):



  (b) Inspection, recording presence. (1) Purses, briefcases, and other containers brought into, while on, or being removed from the property are subject to inspection. However, items brought directly to a postal facility’s customer mailing acceptance area and deposited in the mail are not subject to inspection, except as provided by section 274 of the Administrative Support Manual. A person arrested for violation of this section may be searched incident to that arrest.


I am not a lawyer. You are receiving this legal review for free and my own personal entertainment. It’s probably worth every penny you paid for it.

Quote of the day–Lazarus Long

Posted on by

What are the facts? Again and again and again what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the “unguessable verdict of history” — what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future, facts are your single clue. Get the facts!

 

Lazarus Long
The Notebooks of Lazarus Long by Robert A. Heinlein pages 16 and 17.
[According to some the Brady Campaign may have a reality awareness moment when pursuing their lawsuit against the changed rule on carry of firearms in National Parks. I would like to think so but I have enough experience in court to know that facts and the truth only play a minor role in the proceedings. Still, the facts are what drive things like my Just One Question and I think it is the proper philosophical principle to demand our opposition adhere to. It is our ace in the hole. Even if they don’t play by the rules and cheat at every opportunity it is still our one of our greatest weapons against the forces of darkness and evil.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Tom Palmer

Posted on by

I know people who don’t understand why anyone would have a gun. They don’t have guns, they didn’t grow up with them, and they assume people who did must be some sort of primitive barbarians.


Tom Palmer
Page 30, Gun Control On Trial by Brian Doherty
[Just like gays in the 80’s Silence = Death. We need to come out of the closet if we want to survive as a free people.–Joe]

Quote of the day–Alan Gura

Posted on by

Look at their literature. About all they say is ‘guns are bad, they kill children and other living things.’ Look at their website. It clearly posits gun ownership as a social evil. He can say what he wants; I like Dennis, and I’ve never had a negative interaction with anybody with his group, but sorry, that’s a bunch of crap. His dream is dead; the idea of prohibition is dead. They need to tell their constituents to find something else to do with their lives, go be productive members of society, stop attacking our individual rights.


Alan Gura
From Gun Control On Trial, page 114.
[First off I would like to +1 Gura’s experience with the gun grabbers. All of the paid and even volunteer staff of the gun-grabber organizations that I have talked to have been nice people. I believe they were sincere and truly had no wish for anything other than the well-being of innocent people. They may not have been very smart or very well informed but their intentions, however misguided, always seemed to be congruent with mine–the protection of innocent life. They just had a problem with data collection and processing.


But on to my main reason for the quote.


I love the last sentence of Gura’s. Gura was referring to the Brady Campaign (and Dennis Henigan) but it could just as well apply to 98% of our politicians. Especially this year–the year of the coronation of the Light Bringer. It’s going to be rough times ahead for freedom and individual rights. We don’t have enough Alan Gura’s and friendly courts to protect us. If only we could enforce a declaration such as Gura’s.–Joe]

Another book reference

Posted on by

I’m spending New Years Eve reading Gun Control On Trial by Brian Doherty. I previously mentioned a direct reference to me in the book from a quick scan I made. A few minutes ago I found another reference on page 53 which almost for certain is about me (and others) and Boomershoot:

I talked to lots of people in the “pro-gun” community, from those who enjoy detonating explosives with semiautomatic rife fire to dealers in highly regulated states like California.

I find it interesting that I am placed on the extreme end of the spectrum. I suppose it is fitting. And it reminds me of two quotes:

Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice.

Thomas Paine

And:

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Barry Goldwater

Update (23:15): I finished the book a few minutes ago. I found my name in the index too.

Also of possible interest to some is that my friend and Boomershoot promoter Stephanie Sailor was mentioned in the acknowledgments. It was via her encouragement that Doherty contacted me.

I’ll have more on the book tomorrow. And I have a great quote for the first day of the new year from the book.

ATF Special Agent explains “Weapons of Choice”

Posted on by


ATF Special Agent in Charge Jim Needles explains “Weapons of Choice” for the Mexican drug cartels.



ATF Special Agent in Charge Jim Needles


See also this news story built around the video interview above.


“Weapons of choice” include semi-auto FN FALs (a popular sport and hunting rifle), AK-47’s, and 1911 style handguns. It appears the news reporters also visited a gun shop and took pictures of AR-15’s as well.


The demonization of ordinary firearms for the next “assault weapon” ban is picking up steam with the help of the ATF.

Brady Campaign sues over National Park carry

Posted on by

As predicted here the Brady Campaign is suing to stop the implementation of the new rule on carrying in National Parks. Unfortunately we won’t have (vice) President Palin in office next month to direct the Justice Department to arrest and prosecute the offenders.



The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence sued the Bush administration Tuesday in hopes of stopping a new policy that would allow people to carry concealed, loaded guns in most national parks and wildlife refuges.


…


The lawsuit said members of the Brady Campaign will no longer visit national parks and refuges “out of fear for their personal safety from those who will now be permitted to carry loaded and concealed weapons in such areas.”


If they were consistent they would stay out of states (and even countries) where concealed carry were allowed. I’d would be much happier if they did.


But if they were consistent that might mean they had the capacity to use logic and data for the basis of their actions. And we all know that would be the end of their organization and they would have to get real jobs rather than being professional bigots.

Quote of the day–Susan Martin

Posted on by

A handgun is a gun that police use, that the military use but ordinary people do not use unless they’re out to kill somebody. There’s no reason to have a handgun.

…

The police should be able to, they see this guy standing in the street and they you know, looking at whatever, they should be able to frisk them and if they have a gun, that gun should be removed and they should go to jail.

Susan Martin
December 26, 2008
A conversation on gun control with Susan Martin, Mario Elia, Karen Ellis-Elia and Sean Daly
[Ignorant of the millions of incidents each year in the U.S. where handguns were used to protect innocent life Ms. Martin imagines a police state as being a better place to live. She lives in Canada where they already have censorship and a (never mind it has failed) gun registry. With those already in place she may get her wish sooner than she thinks. I think she should be careful what she wishes for.–Joe]

Update: They let my comment go through (comments were moderated):

I have a great deal of sympathy for those who have suffered such losses but there is Just One Question (https://blog.joehuffman.org/2004/12/14/just-one-question/) that needs to be asked before advocating more restrictions on firearms. That question is: “Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?”
Until that question can be answered in the affirmative those that advocate for more restrictions on firearms are actually advocating for an unjustified taking of freedom.

Update2: I left another comment (12/30/2008):

I find it very telling that those advocating for more gun control claim it will reduce “gun violence”. This claim is doubtful (the counter example of the U.K. experience is just one reason to doubt it) but furthermore they do not claim it will reduce violent crime. But by carefully choosing their words they lump praiseworthy violence in defense of innocent live in the same category as criminal acts. Those same carefully chosen words also overlook that the total violent crime rate can (and frequently does) increase when people are prevented from using firearms for self defense.

And also telling is the same advocates for gun control repeatedly refuse to answer Just One Question, “Can you demonstrate one time or place, throughout all history, where the average person was made safer by restricting access to handheld weapons?”

Because they cannot answer this one question it shows that safety is not the objective of their advocating for increased restrictions on firearms. They have some other agenda which they are not sharing.

Yammering to ban air guns now–yawn

Posted on by


In the U.K. they have banned handguns, some long guns, have heavy restrictions on all long guns, and restrictions on knives. There should be no surprise there are now calls for the banning of air guns:




A POLICE chief has backed stricter controls on selling BB guns after a teenager was shot in the eye at close range with one of the replica firearms.


Angry mum Lynn Colley called for a ban on the weapons after her daughter Paige, 14, was left temporarily blind by a ball bearing fired at her face.

Quote of the day–Sebastian of Snowflakes in Hell

Posted on by

Merry Christmas to you all.  Let’s all enjoy it.  The Grinch is coming to town on January 20th, and we don’t yet know which presents he’s going to try to take away.


Sebastian of Snowflakes in Hell
December 25, 2008
Merry Christmas
[I was tempted to use something I got in email which was more in line with my true feelings, but little overdone, about Christmas:



Having returned from my customary drive around the neighborhood shouting “Bah, Humbug” at everyone, with a reindeer dummy strapped to the car, Merry Christmas to all!


But I didn’t want to go through the bother of sending an email to get permission to use their name and Sebastain captures my mood a little bit better.–Joe]

Quote of the day–David B. Kopel

Posted on by

For all ages, the fatal gun accident rate is at an all-time low, even as the per capita gun supply is at an all-time high. The annual risk level for a fatal gun accident is 0.22 per 100,000 population–about the risk level for taking two airplane trips a year, or for a whooping cough vaccination.


David B. Kopel
Brief of The International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association (ILEETA), The International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors (IALEFI), Maryland State Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police, Southern States Police Benevolent Association, 29 Elected California District Attorneys, San Francisco Veteran Police Officers Association, Long Beach Police Officers Association, Texas Police Chiefs Association, Texas Municipal Police Association, New York State Association of Auxiliary Police, Mendocino County, Calif., Sheriff Thomas D. Allman, Oregon State Rep. Andy Olson, National Police Defense Foundation, Law Enforcement Alliance of America, and The Independence Institute as amici curiae in support of respondent. D.C. v. Heller

What the frak?

Posted on by

The implications of the existence of this computer program are disturbing. There must be something else going on other than what the author is saying:



SHELBY- No suspects. No leads. Just a gun found at a crime scene.
While some law-enforcement agencies scratch their heads wondering how to start investigating the case, the Shelby Police Department uses their own investigative tool to solve the crime.
An Electronic Tracing System, or “E-trace,” is a free Internet-based system which allows authorities to create or look at the criminal history of a gun used in a crime.
“It gives me added information on a weapon,” said Lt. Tim Walker with the department’s vice and narcotics unit. “It gives me somewhere to start and gives the past actions of the weapon.”
Walker said E-trace has made a world of difference when investigating and solving crimes.
“It is comparable to a person’s criminal history,” he said.
Once the criminal history is created on the gun, it can always be traced in the system, Walker said.
“If a gun is being continually used in criminal activity, we can see who is using the same weapons over and over,” he said.
Walker said it also helps with “straw purchase” cases, when convicted felons who are unable to purchase guns rely on people who can.
Walker said if felons have someone to purchase the gun and a crime is then committed, they can track the person who is buying the guns.
“It starts to create a link between the person and the gun,” he said.
The program is provided through Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) and is free to any police agency. Shelby officers say it is a part of their daily routine.
“When any weapon is submitted to evidence, it prompts us to trace the weapon,” he said.
In recent weeks, police used E-trace to help with with local cases. One gun taken into evidence showed just 60 days from time of purchase to the time of the crime, Walker said.
In the past, if police found a gun at a crime scene, they would lock it up and wait on fingerprints or any information pertaining to the gun.
Last year, the program expanded and is now used in every division of the department.
“It’s just one more trick in my bag,” he said.


For those unfamiliar with U.S. gun laws. It is illegal for the Federal Government to have a gun registry. Without a gun registry how can this program work? How can they “look at the criminal history of a gun”? It’s not like the criminal that used it updated the registry when they were done with it and sold it to the next criminal. What is the world is this about?


Ahhh… more research has revealed some disturbing information:



  • Governor Announces Historic Partnership with ATF to Trace Illegal Firearms
    E-trace is a nationwide database maintained by the ATF that lists a firearm’s first purchaser, date of purchase and the retailer from which it was purchased. The information is compiled from police records of gun purchases provided by local departments, but until today was only accessible by the ATF and the police department that provided it.
    …
    “Partnering with the ATF, the New Jersey State Police will now have direct access to national firearms purchasing data. This will streamline the tracing of illegal firearms back to the source, giving us a better shot at finding and arresting the person who pulled the trigger,” said Colonel Rick Fuentes.
  • Seven Central American Countries to get eTrace
  • Background Paper: Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Program on Tracing Illegal Small Arms (June 2, 2001)
    Of particular interest is Access 2000, a computerized link between the NTC and firearms manufacturers and wholesalers. This nexus allows the NTB instant access to the computerized records maintained by cooperating FFLs in order to complete traces more efficiently. Currently, 12 FFLs are online. ATF is continuing this working partnership with the firearms industry in order to facilitate the tracing of crime guns by use of a standardized automated system. Instant access allows NTB employees to query the history of an individual serial number, thus speeding up the tracing process and reducing the trace-related cost to industry. Of course, 24-hour access allows NTB employees to query the history of firearms as necessary.

As of February 2000 there were five manufactures and distributors using Access 2000: RSR Wholesale; H&R, 1871; Smith & Wesson; Davidson Wholesale; and Taurus International Firearms.


What appears to have happened was that the ATF came up with an Internet based system for the distributors and manufactures to make their sales records available to the ATF to save the businesses in the supply chain time and money in complying with trace requests. This did not give the ATF access to individual purchase records. It merely gave the ATF more immediate access to the FFL who would still have to look up the 4473 to get the sales record for the ATF. It appears this original functionality was extended, perhaps in an illegal manner.


The enhanced functionality which I question the legality of is that it appears some states have records of individual firearm sales which they are sharing, in an online way, with the ATF.


I will be sending out emails to lawyers familiar with gun laws I know to get clarification of the law on this point. I’ll let you know what I find out.

Quote of the day–Jerry M. Burger

Posted on by

The conclusion is not: ‘Gosh isn’t this a horrible commentary on human nature,’ or ‘these people were so sadistic. It shows the opposite — that there are situational forces that have a much greater impact on our behavior than most people recognize.

 

Jerry M. Burger
December 20, 2008
Shocking revelation: Santa Clara University professor mirrors famous torture study
[This is a reproduction of the infamous Milgram Experiments. I must conclude that this is either a facet of human psychology or at least a facet of multiple cultures. These results have tremendous impact on everything from the Holocaust, Jonestown, and civil rights to gun confiscation. Do not count on people to “do the right thing” if they are given the option of using the excuse “I was just following orders”.–Joe]