[TOG]

In an article in National Review Online's "The Corner" about law enforcement leaks to the news media I read this:

"For the arresting officers, there was another wrinkle. They knew from running Shahzad's name through databases that he had purchased a gun in March."

I was under the impression that information from 4472 forms was specifically forbidden to be culled into databases. Is my impression correct? And if so, is that prohibition being ignored by the government?

Or is there another source of that information; is there a state form filed when purchasing a firearm in Connecticut?

I cannot imagine any police department attempting a felony arrest of a suspect of attempted mayhem, assuming said subject would be unarmed; the information in that database should have been redundant. However, the fact that it exists concerns me deeply.

Does anyone have any insight into specifically what database contained that information?

The Old Guy

 

[hailstone]

Anything is possible when it comes to law enforcement and government. Both think they are above the law at times. I personally haven't heard of anything either through my experiences, contacts or internet travels. Might be something you would have to go back to original publisher, author/writer and attempt to get some answers but would bet they will be on guard. My suspicious nature says that its being done but that's only my belief.

 

[pisgah]

I kn ow some states maintain such information, and I know the federal law forbids the federal government from doing so. But one day a couple of years go, I got a phone call from a police sergeant in a town 100 miles away. He asked me if I had had a certain 1911 stolen. I told him that, no, I had traded it off at a gun show 3 years earlier, and asked him why he wanted to know. Seems he had found a duffle bag lying in the middle of a residential street in his town and, lo and behold, inside the bag along with a bunch of clothing was "my" 1911. It wasn't until I had hung up the phone that I wondered -- how did he know it had been mine?

 

[manyplews]

Yes,I'm sure they are storing data on everything they can collect.

Heck,the Federal government has a security agency that collects all e-mails,internet postings,phone calls,etc. and computer programs that sort,sift,and store what they want.
I'm sure they also monitor on-line forums so be careful what you post.

 

[zb338]

I know a Police Officer in my state (N.J.) that was buying a lot
of guns through his Department (legally). Someone became
interested and sent him a letter describing every gun he owned
and asked a few questions. Nothing ever came of it, but he was
amazed that they had all his guns listed. How? don't know.

Zeke

 

[mike sicowitz]

Hi guys,
I saw some articles doing research in grad school not too long ago that claimed Homeland Security trumps every previous law protecting privacy. I became interested in privacy long before 9/11. It was an event ( tragic as it was) that allowed the Whitehouse basement to do what they wanted with few restrictions. Buying a certain number of guns and of what type is easily a redflag that demonstates possible intent. That's what was coming way before 9/11, that day just made it legal sooner. The basement is just a term for all the off the books agencies that first began during WW11 that really were in the basement of the White house. Since Nixon they have grown so large that they now have their own building although the basement still exists and answers only to the president-no laws or forms apply or protect rights of anyone-being a 'good guy' does not matter. There is no privacy and there are several ways to prove it. Ten years ago when GPS was allowed to go public was the last hurdle. Now--where you are, what you look like, how much you make, and how many guns you have is known by thousands of citizens. Many government agencies do not have access to your very personal information, however something like buying habits and access to lethal force is common knowledge.
MS

 

[MZ5]

Clearly all the pertinent info about the buyer is typed into a database system when the NICS check occurs (otherwise, it can't do the check). What if that info, plus firearm type and s/n, is simply retained in a separate database? Then nobody's 'mining' the 4473s themselves, but all the info gets into a database which can be queried at any time. Doesn't seem too complicated to me, and in fact it seems a bit naive to me to think it doesn't happen in approximately this way.

 

[MZ5]

Hi guys,
I saw some articles doing research in grad school not too long ago that claimed Homeland Security trumps every previous law protecting privacy.

Yes, the Gestapo has unquestionably been re-born.

Now--where you are, what you look like, how much you make, and how many guns you have is known by thousands of citizens.

Perhaps, but this kind of information is far more widely known, refined, and utilized by private industry than government. Gov't is dramatically behind in this, though it often piques conspiracy theorists' interest more to talk about gov't.

 

[kdub]

When this turns into a political harangue - it gets closed.

It's on the verge now.

 

[mike sicowitz]

Hi again,
I'm not sure I should tell some of this. The Whitehouse basement does not exist-except for the fact that it does, and has for at least sixty some years. Certain information 'groups' I say groups because they are composed of citizens-with the highest of the high clearance. They are not government-but work for the president. Some even work in the basement-like the old days-It has to be this way. A new president has people he knows and trusts around him. Some of the people he would trust the least are government people-for good reason-they leak. If you study the structure, you can see how agencies exist to exist. They always want a higher budget and do things to prove how invaluable they are. That's the game. A guy named Herbert Simon could explain it better than I ever could. He won the Nobel Peace Prize doing just that. Another gospel of how things accually work can be found in ''The End of Liberalism'' by T. Lowi from 1969. It's a must read for a serious student of the real world-that is if you have the dedication to spend a few days reading. The bottom line is that private interest try very hard to run the country and the president has his basement intelligence (who he trusts) as a buffer and as fact finders rather than listen to governmental agencies (who he does not trust) who generally just want more money. It's a system that works better than listening to lobbys and self-centered governmental agencies. In a nutshell, the president trusts a handful of people. Government grew by an absurd amount under the Bush Ad. He spent trillions on the creation of redundent layers of intelligence. The reduction of the redundency would seem to be more efficient. But once created, an agency is next to impossible to erase, hence all the information that only god knows goes where it goes. Certainly only a fraction is of any real value, and because agencies constantly compete with each other, there is rarely a connection made between agencies due to the desire not to share information. The desire not to share information is enhanced by the agencies desire to have more resources (buget increase) making the agency less likely to get the ax. Someday someone just may have the xxxxx to eliminate those current information-gathering agencies that are making our lives miserable-but don't count on it-they vote. Again, I hate the system too, but you can't blame a guy who is surrounded by a phone book full of agencies that all want more. This is why there is another way of doing things-in-house. This problem has been known for decades and changes in administrations have done nothing to stop the growth of government. At one time in my life I thought I could make a difference. I really tried. But it's not going to happen in our lifetimes.
MS

 

[mattsbox99]

New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and California do collect information and maintain databases of firearm owners. Most other states do not. The Federal Gov't does not collect this information though, the only way they would get the information is if they seize a dealer's transfer logbook.

 

[MontyF]

I kn ow some states maintain such information, and I know the federal law forbids the federal government from doing so. But one day a couple of years go, I got a phone call from a police sergeant in a town 100 miles away. He asked me if I had had a certain 1911 stolen. I told him that, no, I had traded it off at a gun show 3 years earlier, and asked him why he wanted to know. Seems he had found a duffle bag lying in the middle of a residential street in his town and, lo and behold, inside the bag along with a bunch of clothing was "my" 1911. It wasn't until I had hung up the phone that I wondered -- how did he know it had been mine?

Just curious, were you the original owner of that 1911? I know citizens can receive information from firearm mfgs. if they supply a serial number. Don't think it will tell who purchased the weapon but will tell who it was shipped to. Might just be a small step then to find out from the dealer who bought it. Now if there is a broken paper trail and and they were able to determine who owns it.... pretty much proves there's a data base somewhere.

 

[miestro_jerry]

I really don't like the direction this thread is going, If the government is doing something wrong, then file a law suit or file a writ, making statement on public forums can cause problems for the forum. Who knows who is watching who these days?

Jerry

 

[MikeG]

It should be fairly simple for law enforcement to trace a firearm, if all of the transactions went through dealers. The manufacturer knows the distributor it went to, then they send it out to a dealer, etc., etc. Get on the phone and start calling.

I'd guess it had a paper trail up to the last owner, and no more.

Or it was a state thing.

 

[slim 60]

i never did buy the idea that the criminal check an gun purchase was not on a govt data something or other..do i think every one that looks at that ,has us gun owners well being,, as thier motive..not hardly. jmo slim

 

[Skull13]

Well here is my two cents. I live in NY state near the canadian border in 1993 I was stopped for a traffic violation the officer asked if I was carring a weapon. He knew I had a C C permit by running my vehicles plates. Just something to think about.

 

[Helix]

Gun traces work like this. A gun needs to be traced for whatever reason, like it has been logged into evidence. The cop calls the manufacturer of said firearm. The manufacturer is required to keep a record of what dealer they sold it to. They tell the cop. The cop then calls the dealer. The dealer opens his legally required log book and finds your name next to that serial number. Your name goes to the cop. He calls you. If you sold it at a gun show or any other way you were not required to keep a record of the trail dies with you. If you sold it to a dealer and you supply the cop with that name he calls them and so on... In states with state run databases they may innitiate the process that way but the trail will still die where records are not required to be kept.

There was recently a case where a foreign government tried to trace some guns that I remember seeing in the news. Made my skin crawl. Can't remember all the details though.

 

[pisgah]

Well here is my two cents. I live in NY state near the canadian border in 1993 I was stopped for a traffic violation the officer asked if I was carring a weapon. He knew I had a C C permit by running my vehicles plates. Just something to think about.

Driver's license and concealed carry permit databases are linked in some states, but not in others. Here in SC, for example -- at least as recently as a year ago when I was still working parttime as a dispatcher for our local police department and sheriff's office -- there was no way to telll if an individual had a valid CWP in SC without making a call to the State Law Enforcement Division during regular Monday thru Friday business hours and talking to a human being, who had to then go look it up.

 

[MontyF]

I think it's probably the same thing in SD. I was driving on a two lane one evening and crossed the centerline. The officer pulled me over and asked for my DL and Ins. When fishing out my DL he seen my carry permit and asked if I was packing. He didn't have a clue up to that point.

As a point of humor he asked why I crossed the center line. I told him to avoid the bicyclist. He informed me there was no biker.... just as the dude pedaled by. I was let go with a warning.

 

[smokinfz1]

Just ask the American Indians how much to trust the U.S. Gov't. If you trust them, I have a bridge to sell you. Just Joking Of Course!!!!! ha...ha...ha..!!???