ATF Is Breaking Federal Law

[duane1969]

This isn't from an article, this is my own information. I am looking into the logistics of getting my Federal Firearms License (FFL) and was looking at the ATF website on the issue and found a conflict.

The Firearm Owners Protection Act prevents a Federal registry of guns purchased by law-abiding citizens. Any gun that does not fall under the scope of National Firearms Act (machine guns, short barrel rifles and shotguns, and silenced guns) may be bought and sold without tracking and record keeping by the Federal government.

Then I read the ATF website data on obtaining an FFL that "Licensees must maintain records of all firearms receipts and dispositions, including the name, age, and place of residence of purchasers. 18 USC 922(b)(5) and 923(g)(1)(A)." and "Licensees who discontinue business must deliver their records to ATF. 18 USC 923(g)(4)."

Now I am sure that gun-haters will admire this little end-around of the law, but the bigger issue that should alarm people is that the Federal government makes laws and then specifically and intentionally ignores them. This is an infringement on citizen's rights. The ATF claims that this is not evidence of creating a database, yet an FFL is required to respond to an ATF inquiry with information about gun purchasers and since the data is turned over to the ATF when you close business they end up with those records. So yes, they do have a database.

At what point do citizens stop accepting the government breaking it's own laws?

[Wickabee]

You're totally correct.
With that said, what do you care? It's not like the ATF is coming after you. They need a few thousand more employees before you'd even hit the radar.

Then they'd need the power to actually do something about it.

Basically, in practice, you're fine.

[mrveggieman]

Technically speaking they are breaking the law but since when has the gov't ever followed the law? That being said I don't have a problem with firearms being registered just like motor vechicles are. I also don't have a problem with a liscencing procedure similiar to how you have to pass a written and road test in order to have a driver's liscence. Again I am 100% in support the second amenment and believe that everyone who choses should be able to legally purchase, keep and collect firearms but c'mon man there needs to be just a tad bit of common sense.

[duane1969]

Wickabee, as we all know, the government can and will at any time redirect it's efforts to wherever it sees fit. Creating a database today creates a checklist or potential revolutionist for tomorrow. With that said, the bigger issue for me is this acceptance that the government gets to have it's own set of rules. Even if a law is made that specifically limts the government, they ignore it and do whatever they please.

veggie, I don't see this as a common sense issue. Guns are kept out of the hands of criminals with background checks. In the last 10 years the background check has prevented 54,000 gun transactions in WV that would have otherwise allowed a convicted felon or someone under an order of protection to purchase a firearm. Background checks are doing their job. There is no purpose to a database other than to tax or to take guns. A database doesn't prevent crime.

[mrveggieman]

Wickabee, as we all know, the government can and will at any time redirect it's efforts to wherever it sees fit. Creating a database today creates a checklist or potential revolutionist for tomorrow. With that said, the bigger issue for me is this acceptance that the government gets to have it's own set of rules. Even if a law is made that specifically limts the government, they ignore it and do whatever they please.

veggie, I don't see this as a common sense issue. Guns are kept out of the hands of criminals with background checks. In the last 10 years the background check has prevented 54,000 gun transactions in WV that would have otherwise allowed a convicted felon or someone under an order of protection to purchase a firearm. Background checks are doing their job. There is no purpose to a database other than to tax or to take guns. A database doesn't prevent crime.

Backround checks are indeed a good thing but why not go through some type of testing to determine if you are capable of using a firearm. What's the point of having one if you don't know how to use it correctly?

[Wickabee]

Duane: I get what you're saying, but 2 things.
1: If the ATF can't even force gun stores to keep inventory of their firearms, how do they have this power and how can it be enforced with their tiny staff?
2: Maybe a list today is a group of people they won't attack because you've got guns? Who knows.

[duane1969]

Backround checks are indeed a good thing but why not go through some type of testing to determine if you are capable of using a firearm. What's the point of having one if you don't know how to use it correctly?

Do you have to pass a driving test to buy a car? I agree with training and a test for a permit to carry, but saying that you need to prove that you can properly handle a gun before you can even buy one is a bit of a reach. That is just opening the door for the government to ban gun sales by making the requirements too high for anyone to buy one.

And that would be redundant. You can't buy a gun because you haven't shown that you can properly operate one, but you can't learn to properly operate one because you are not allowed to have one.

[Wickabee]

Actually, a test to carry is a better comparison to driving licences.
So basically, anyone can own a gun, but if you take it off property without passing a basic knowledge and use test you're now a criminal?
I kind of like that.

[duane1969]

Duane: I get what you're saying, but 2 things.
1: If the ATF can't even force gun stores to keep inventory of their firearms, how do they have this power and how can it be enforced with their tiny staff?
2: Maybe a list today is a group of people they won't attack because you've got guns? Who knows.

1. It isn't keeping an inventory of guns in stock, I get the purpose of that and have no issues with it. It is keeping a record of the names, addresses and phone numbers of anyone who bought one. Incidentally, that data also includes drivers license numbers and Social Security numbers as you are required to enter those on a background check form.

2. Wishful thinking.

[Wickabee]

1: So basically the same information they take when you get a DL plus that DL number? Oh the humanity...
2: It has the same level of possibility. The fact it goes the other way means nothing.