Honest Discussion By A Pro-Gun Advocate On Firearm Laws

[Nous]

The FBI does not investigate dealers...you have already admitted you made a mistake once, why try again.
NICS Process for FFLs

My red font coloring:

28 CFR 25.9 - Retention and destruction of records in the system

§ 25.9 Retention and destruction of records in the system.

(a) The NICS will retain NICS Index records that indicate that receipt of a firearm by the individuals to whom the records pertain would violate Federal or state law. The NICS will retain such records indefinitely, unless they are canceled by the originating agency. In cases where a firearms disability is not permanent, e.g., a disqualifying restraining order, the NICS will automatically purge the pertinent record when it is no longer disqualifying. Unless otherwise removed, records contained in the NCIC and III files that are accessed during a background check will remain in those files in accordance with established policy.

(b) The FBI will maintain an automated NICS Audit Log of all incoming and outgoing transactions that pass through the system.

(1)Contents. The NICS Audit Log will record the following information: Type of transaction (inquiry or response), line number, time, date of inquiry, header, message key, ORI or FFL identifier, and inquiry/response data (including the name and other identifying information about the prospective transferee and the NTN).

(i) NICS denied transaction records obtained or created in the course of the operation of the system will be retained in the Audit Log for 10 years, after which time they will be transferred to an appropriate FBI-maintained electronic database.

28 CFR 25.9 - Retention and destruction of records in the system.

Now would you please explain to me what reason you see for any law enforcement officer to refer to the NICS data base when investigating a crime.

Done did, numerous times. E.g., in order to determine whether an FFL is routinely selling guns to persons who are not allowed to purchase guns.

 

[esmith]

My red font coloring:

28 CFR 25.9 - Retention and destruction of records in the system

§ 25.9 Retention and destruction of records in the system.

(a) The NICS will retain NICS Index records that indicate that receipt of a firearm by the individuals to whom the records pertain would violate Federal or state law. The NICS will retain such records indefinitely, unless they are canceled by the originating agency. In cases where a firearms disability is not permanent, e.g., a disqualifying restraining order, the NICS will automatically purge the pertinent record when it is no longer disqualifying. Unless otherwise removed, records contained in the NCIC and III files that are accessed during a background check will remain in those files in accordance with established policy.

(b) The FBI will maintain an automated NICS Audit Log of all incoming and outgoing transactions that pass through the system.

(1)Contents. The NICS Audit Log will record the following information: Type of transaction (inquiry or response), line number, time, date of inquiry, header, message key, ORI or FFL identifier, and inquiry/response data (including the name and other identifying information about the prospective transferee and the NTN).

(i) NICS denied transaction records obtained or created in the course of the operation of the system will be retained in the Audit Log for 10 years, after which time they will be transferred to an appropriate FBI-maintained electronic database.

28 CFR 25.9 - Retention and destruction of records in the system.

Done did, numerous times. E.g., in order to determine whether an FFL is routinely selling guns to persons who are not allowed to purchase guns.

Ok, I will agree with you that the records of those that were denied are retained.
What you still have not answered is why a LEO would go to the NICS data base for information?
Can you do that, heck I'll even allow you speculation.

 

[oldbadger]

NRA Explore | America's Rifle Challenge
Match versus Service Rifle—Which is Best For You?
The Exciting Sport of 3-Gun Shooting • NSSF

Hmmmm....... most of those just look like enhanced plinking games.
You haven't got an International or Olympic style competition amongst those.
Oh well.........

 

[Nous]

Ok, I will agree with you that the records of those that were denied are retained.
What you still have not answered is why a LEO would go to the NICS data base for information?

How many times do I need to repeat this:

E.g., in order to determine whether an FFL is routinely selling guns to persons who are not allowed to purchase guns.

?

The issue of retention of records arose here first in response to someone's claim that private individuals, not just FFL's, should be able to make background check inquiries; I noted that the FFL requirement is presumably is for identification purposes. Otherwise, an individual could sell guns to persons who are not allowed to purchase guns, and the seller might never be identified. That's why the FBI maintains a record of denials, including of the FFL that inquired.

 

[esmith]

Hmmmm....... most of those just look like enhanced plinking games.
You haven't got an International or Olympic style competition amongst those.
Oh well.........

So, what do you consider an International or Olympic style competition with a rifle?

 

[esmith]

How many times do I need to repeat this:

E.g., in order to determine whether an FFL is routinely selling guns to persons who are not allowed to purchase guns.

?

The issue of retention of records arose here first in response to someone's claim that private individuals, not just FFL's, should be able to make background check inquiries; I noted that the FFL requirement is presumably is for identification purposes. Otherwise, an individual could sell guns to persons who are not allowed to purchase guns, and the seller might never be identified. That's why the FBI maintains a record of denials, including of the FFL that inquired.

If you would get out of your bubble world and into the real world you might just learn something.
https://oig.justice.gov/reports/ATF/e0405/final.pdf

 

[Falvlun]

If you would get out of your bubble world and into the real world you might just learn something.
https://oig.justice.gov/reports/ATF/e0405/final.pdf

That’s a 117 pg document. Could you indicate which page or passage is relevant?

 

[esmith]

That’s a 117 pg document. Could you indicate which page or passage is relevant?

Using PDF page count try through page 40

 

[oldbadger]

So, what do you consider an International or Olympic style competition with a rifle?

There are several of course, but the first two, the very first two to pop within are the BIATHALON AND RUNNING BORE. Of course the Running Bore was once shot with a semi-auto rifle at 50 yds (meters?) crossing at 15 and 25 mph. I had the opportunity to train and attempt entry into the Brit Montreal team for 1976 games but poverty and extreme sickness kicked all that for six. Today the Running Bore competition is shot with special air rifles.

I cannot remember much about the Semi-auto I shot with, I borrowed Mr P's. Now that would have been a good AR-15 competition but as you can see there, they were introducing more manual guns into those two competitions.

I don't know what shotguns they use in the Olympics now, but the point is that gun-sports can remain extremely challenging with manual guns.

 

[esmith]

There are several of course, but the first two, the very first two to pop within are the BIATHALON AND RUNNING BORE. Of course the Running Bore was once shot with a semi-auto rifle at 50 yds (meters?) crossing at 15 and 25 mph. I had the opportunity to train and attempt entry into the Brit Montreal team for 1976 games but poverty and extreme sickness kicked all that for six. Today the Running Bore competition is shot with special air rifles.

I cannot remember much about the Semi-auto I shot with, I borrowed Mr P's. Now that would have been a good AR-15 competition but as you can see there, they were introducing more manual guns into those two competitions.

I don't know what shotguns they use in the Olympics now, but the point is that gun-sports can remain extremely challenging with manual guns.

they have these type completions, you just have to look for them. yes they can be challenging with manual firearms but they are also challenging with semi-automatics. Just because some people don't like semi-auto's doesn't mean their prejudices have to affect those that enjoy shooting them. Or do you not agree?

 

[Wirey]

When 9-11 occurred the Nation came together and created the TSA, then they started making you remove your shoes, then the size of bottles in your carry-on; more and more checks were put in place as the terrorist devised more ways to cause a catastrophic event. We thought out what is the best way to approach this problem not what is the best way to score political points.
The same thing has to happen at our schools, we have to make it harder for someone bent on attacking the school. This idea that removing X firearm from civilian hands does not solve the problem.
So, let's start out by "hardening" our schools. If school districts or even State wide want to allow staff to be armed and insures that proper and continued training takes place let them do so. I say have an open discussion in each school district whether they want to participate or not if the State says they may do so.
After schools have been "hardened" we can start discussing means of keeping firearms out of the hands of those that should not have them; but only after we have fixed the major problem....Schools are easy targets for the I-wanna-be's.

Most other European and European descended nations have "soft" schools, gun control laws, and little to no school shootings. Maybe you should reverse that order. No one needs an AR-15 or a Ruger mini-14, they want one. I trapped and hunted for years and the only semi I ever had was a Remington Mohawk, and that was a gift from my Dad.

EDIT: I don't mean this as a criticism of your point. I think this illustrates what I said earlier. You see a gun as a necessity for safety, while I see it as a danger to my safety.

 

[oldbadger]

they have these type completions, you just have to look for them. yes they can be challenging with manual firearms but they are also challenging with semi-automatics. Just because some people don't like semi-auto's doesn't mean their prejudices have to affect those that enjoy shooting them. Or do you not agree?

You guessed..... I can't agree.
As you know, after the Dunblane mass-murder Brit public opinion against (nearly) all fast-fire guns and (nearly) all pistols was so extreme that they got banned, and even such Olympic competitions have had to be held in other countries when we have hosted the Games. It's the cost of better security and safety, and so far it has worked for nearly twenty years.
You are getting a school killing (on average) most weeks in the USA.

Where a competition can be held without a particular gun then why not carry on? I don't know whether the running boar competition is better or worse for being held with special air-rifles, but I'll bet that its a bloody tough challenge regardless.

If stronger controls might be initiated I don't expect that folks like you would be much affected, and I doubt that any bans would be effected, but if, for instance, better home security was introduced, or 'all-risks-indemnity' insurance for all, that could only be good for everybody..... surely?

 

[esmith]

You guessed..... I can't agree.
As you know, after the Dunblane mass-murder Brit public opinion against (nearly) all fast-fire guns and (nearly) all pistols was so extreme that they got banned, and even such Olympic competitions have had to be held in other countries when we have hosted the Games. It's the cost of better security and safety, and so far it has worked for nearly twenty years.
You are getting a school killing (on average) most weeks in the USA.

Where a competition can be held without a particular gun then why not carry on? I don't know whether the running boar competition is better or worse for being held with special air-rifles, but I'll bet that its a bloody tough challenge regardless.

If stronger controls might be initiated I don't expect that folks like you would be much affected, and I doubt that any bans would be effected, but if, for instance, better home security was introduced, or 'all-risks-indemnity' insurance for all, that could only be good for everybody..... surely?

Hard to say if I would be affected by stricter regulations, if they went to the CA extreme I would be in violation of the law.
As far as competition, how about:
Tactical Action/Three-Gun Shooting at TRC

 

[Curious George]

Hard to say if I would be affected by stricter regulations, if they went to the CA extreme I would be in violation of the law.
As far as competition, how about:
Tactical Action/Three-Gun Shooting at TRC

Pretty sure that you would be grandfathered in by all of California law.

 

[jonathan180iq]

When 9-11 occurred the Nation came together and created the TSA, then they started making you remove your shoes, then the size of bottles in your carry-on; more and more checks were put in place as the terrorist devised more ways to cause a catastrophic event. We thought out what is the best way to approach this problem not what is the best way to score political points.

In other words, we made it harder for people to get dangerous things into places where they could cause a lot of damage... Kinda like the idea that not everyone-and-their-mother should own a high-powered semiautomatic rifle, or be packin' in the library, right?

We restricted people's comforts because we realized it was better for everyone. Why shouldn't we do something similar with firearms?

 

[esmith]

Pretty sure that you would be grandfathered in by all of California law.

Think you might be wrong.
Why California gun owners may be breaking the law on July 1

 

[esmith]

In other words, we made it harder for people to get dangerous things into places where they could cause a lot of damage... Kinda like the idea that not everyone-and-their-mother should own a high-powered semiautomatic rifle, or be packin' in the library, right?

We restricted people's comforts because we realized it was better for everyone. Why shouldn't we do something similar with firearms?

Because of something called the Constitution.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

England outlawed handguns in 1996. Since Then there have been 5 mass murders.

In the 20 years previous there were 3. One of them was Pan Am flight 103.

 

[Curious George]

Think you might be wrong.
Why California gun owners may be breaking the law on July 1

Lol, so I am...sort of...

There is an injunction on the law and the case is not resolved. So as of this moment, you would still be grandfathered in, correct?

 

[esmith]

Lol, so I am...sort of...

There is an injunction on the law and the case is not resolved. So as of this moment, you would still be grandfathered in, correct?

I don't know and I would definitely not want to find out.