NPR airs segment on how the BATFE handles records

[JettaKnight]

All Things Considered had a lengthy story on how guns are traced and what happens to records when they are delivered to the BATFE.

The Low-Tech Way Guns Get Traced : NPR

I found it interesting that they scan the forms into a computer (as images, not text)... and that at least one dealer used toilet paper for their A&D book.

And this is the face of the ATF, hard at work:

 

[rvb]

They don't have that searchable, central database because the National Rifle Association and the gun lobby have successfully blocked that through Congress. They argue that a database of gun transactions would be a dangerous step toward a national gun registry

This type of mental/semantics gymnastics makes me furious. It's old fashioned, so it's not a database/registry? It's different means to an end, but the end result is the same. The registry exists, it's just in boxes stacked to the ceiling. The information is there; just because it's not digital doesn't mean the information isn't used the same way.

As I kept saying during the recent gun control debates.... the gun show loophole is nothing more than a registry loophole. They want your name in one of those boxes... and ultimately they want those boxes to someday be scanned into a searchable digital format.

The fact that this many man hours is spent doing something with information they aren't supposed to have should be considered fraud/waste/abuse at the very least.

Houser admits that this whole process looks pretty ugly, but he maintains that it is effective

not a registry? if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck.... the govt will claim they aren't allowed to maintain ducks.

-rvb

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Its not a registry. At best, its a way to see who the last person who bought it from an FFL is. Compare this to an actual registry, like for fully automatic weapons, which lets you find who owns a particular weapon right now.

Its not a database. Database implies that it can be sorted, queried by field, etc by a computer. The BMV maintains a database. You can search by VIN and instantly see who the last person who registered the car was. You can search by a driver's license number and see what cars are registered to that person currently and in the past.

It IS a collection of data, but is far from a registry or database.

 

[BTSTEVE]

Its not a registry. At best, its a way to see who the last person who bought it from an FFL is. Compare this to an actual registry, like for fully automatic weapons, which lets you find who owns a particular weapon right now.

Its not a database. Database implies that it can be sorted, queried by field, etc by a computer. The BMV maintains a database. You can search by VIN and instantly see who the last person who registered the car was. You can search by a driver's license number and see what cars are registered to that person currently and in the past.

It IS a collection of data, but is far from a registry or database.

Yes, but for only around 250k they can have a solution in place and have it all scanned into a database within a month. Then they could query by whatever means they want. They could and probably will. It is not very expensive in terms of what their budget is.

They need to create a database on the nut jobs that have psychiatric problems and what to shoot up movie theaters and schools and search those.

 

[ghuns]

The records they are digitizing are only from dealers who, upon closing their doors, must hand over their records to BATFE.

The report also stated that most urgent trace requests are completed within 24 hours. Sounds acceptable to me. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Yes, but for only around 250k they can have a solution in place and have it all scanned into a database within a month. Then they could query by whatever means they want. They could and probably will. It is not very expensive in terms of what their budget is.

They need to create a database on the nut jobs that have psychiatric problems and what to shoot up movie theaters and schools and search those.

They've spent about a billion doing so unsuccessfully with VA records. Where'd the $250k and one month come from? I suppose its technically possible, but as the article points out that's illegal at this point. It still wouldn't be a full registry, as private sales aren't tracked.

 

[level0]

It still wouldn't be a full registry, as private sales aren't tracked.

Thank goodness. But for how long? Too much socialism.

 

[BTSTEVE]

They've spent about a billion doing so unsuccessfully with VA records. Where'd the $250k and one month come from? I suppose its technically possible, but as the article points out that's illegal at this point. It still wouldn't be a full registry, as private sales aren't tracked.

I was just saying it is easy to do, and does not cost that much. They pay $500 for a hammer or toilet seat, so I guess a billion and they still cannot get it right sounds correct. If they ever decide to turn it into a searchable database, it could be done VERY fast and for not much money if done right.

Illegal never stopped the government! Just watch the news.

 

[ghuns]

Jon Stewart, of all people, made an excellent observation the other day; how can the millions of gun owners in this country ever be convinced universal background checks or any kind of registry will not be abused in light of recent news?

We all knew the answer, but it was nice to see a light bulb come on over the head of someone of his political leaning.

 

[rvb]

Its not a registry. At best, its a way to see who the last person who bought it from an FFL(1) is. Compare this to an actual registry, like for fully automatic weapons, which lets you find who owns a particular weapon right now(2).

Its not a database. Database implies that it can be sorted, queried by field, etc by a computer. The BMV maintains a database. You can search by VIN and instantly see who the last person who registered the car was. You can search by a driver's license number and see what cars are registered to that person currently and in the past.

It IS a collection of data, but is far from a registry or database.

More semantics games. (2) The information is collected and they do use it to "find who owns a particular weapon right now." The article told us how they do it! In the digital age we have a specific idea of what a database or registry should do or look like. Hell, I don't even know that NFA items are digitized; it's all internal paper trail, too, as far as I know (It certainly was paper from 1934 through 70s!). Boxes of paper is a perfectly valid form of a registry. The end result is the same.


Currently the data is spread out among the FFLs and the ATF vs all on one computer server. just because they have to make some phone calls vs type a couple key words on their computer, that's supposed to make me feel better?

(1) So you're right that the current "collection of data" only points to the last person who bought the gun from an FFL. The exception to the "not-a-registry" is private sales, and that is the loophole they wanted to close most recently.

From a recent thread:
Senate rejects background checks on gun purchases in 54-46 vote - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) has proposed legislation that would allow potential gun buyers to conduct background checks on themselves and present certification to sellers. Coburn said his plan would give gun owners comfort that they are not selling firearms to criminals or the mentally ill.
Coburn said he expected a vote on his amendment on Thursday.
But Democrats and gun-control advocates say the Coburn proposal is too weak because it would not require recordkeeping to help law enforcement prosecute illegal sales and transfers.

"keeping guns out of the hands of criminals" or "universal background checks" is politician speak for "improving the registry we aren't supposed to have."

The data originates and is originally stored at the FFLs. But it all ends up at a central place (ATF). You and the ATF call it a "collection of data." Fine. Call it anything you want. I say it's used in the same manner as a registry. They've made it clear they want to collect even more data.

If they've gone to the hassle of digitally scanning all the bound books they've gotten, what's to stop a minor tweak of legislation allowing them to turn on OCR and making a registry by YOUR definition. They've collected and maintained all the information they need to do so.

The govt also told me AlQaeda was on the run, Benghazi was because of youtube, and the IRS would never selectively audit or financially harm organizations because of political affiliation.

-rvb

 

[rvb]

Jon Stewart, of all people, made an excellent observation the other day; how can the millions of gun owners in this country ever be convinced universal background checks or any kind of registry will not be abused in light of recent news?

We all knew the answer, but it was nice to see a light bulb come on over the head of someone of his political leaning.

I didn't hear about him saying that... do you happen to have a video link?

That's great that others may be starting to see that a law that creates the potential for abuse is nearly as bad as the abuse itself.

-rvb

 

[ghuns]

I didn't hear about him saying that... do you happen to have a video link?

That's great that others may be starting to see that a law that creates the potential for abuse is nearly as bad as the abuse itself.

-rvb

Starts around 4:30, but the whole thing is comedy gold.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Gander Mountain is already working toward a digital, searchable database.

I Bought an O/U there yesterday. They make you fill out the 4473 on a computer which prints out the actual form for you to sign and make it legal.

Walking out the door I thought to myself, "wait a minute, their system is now searchable. I wonder how many more big box sporting goods stores are doing this."

I Think I'll pass on buying firearms there again.

I think the current paper system is a reasonable balance of privacy and traceability.

Oh, and simply scanning a peice of paper isnt as easy as you might think to make it searchable. IF its a typewritten form its a piece of cake. The overwhelming majority of them are not. Handwriting is not so easy to OCR into computer readable text. Since those forms are handwritten, with today's technology the best you are going to get is a "digital microfiche"... a collection of page images that a human still needs to flip through to find out the info they need. If you want all that handwriting in the system accurately you'll need a human to hand enter the data at worst, or confirm and correct what the computer THINKS you wrote at best.

How do I know? My company looked into a system that converts handwritten form data into computer readable text in real time. Even having a known set of users, it still takes a while for the system to be trained to recognize each person's handwriting styles over time as a clerical worker reviews what the computer thinks it understood and corrects it. Without training to each and every unique person its pretty hard to do handwritten OCR. The only semi reliable systems are the forms that make you print one letter in each box on the form.

 

[LP1]

Yes, but for only around 250k they can have a solution in place and have it all scanned into a database within a month. Then they could query by whatever means they want. They could and probably will. It is not very expensive in terms of what their budget is.

Which will lead them to the last purchaser from an FFL. How often do you think that the last purchaser from FFL = the criminal who used the gun in a crime?

 

[rvb]

Which will lead them to the last purchaser from an FFL. How often do you think that the last purchaser from FFL = the criminal who used the gun in a crime?

So just because there are gaps in the data (eg legal private transfers, a gap congress was recently trying to close), and there are people who break the law (eg straw purchasers), does that make it less of a registry?

-rvb

 

[rvb]

Starts around 4:30, but the whole thing is comedy gold.

awesome! thanks.
-rvb

 

[rvb]

Oh, and simply scanning a peice of paper isnt as easy as you might think to make it searchable. IF its a typewritten form its a piece of cake. The overwhelming majority of them are not. Handwriting is not so easy to OCR into computer readable text.

Yes, OCR isn't currently up to the task. Monkeys w/ typewriters could handle the data entry. Even if they do nothing with the current boxes of information, it is a tiny line item change in legislation to allow them to enter all transfers going forward into a computerized database. This was a big concern that such a tweak would get snuck into "universal background check" legislation that was being debated this spring.

-rvb

 

[JettaKnight]

Gander Mountain is already working toward a digital, searchable database.

I Bought an O/U there yesterday. They make you fill out the 4473 on a computer which prints out the actual form for you to sign and make it legal.

Walking out the door I thought to myself, "wait a minute, their system is now searchable. I wonder how many more big box sporting goods stores are doing this."

I'm not sure they kept a copy electronically. They could type it into the PDF form, print it, save the printed copy (mandated for twenty years), and never save the electronic copy.

What they are required to keep is and A&D record. This could be electronic for the dealer, but they have to print hard copies for the Feds. A dealer might be able to correct me, but I don't believe the ATF accepts any electronic log book.

I think the current paper system is a reasonable balance of privacy and traceability.

I kind of agree. But, the high-level question is why do you NEED to trace a gun? Or more so, why a gun and not a pressure cooker?

Oh, and simply scanning a piece of paper isn't as easy as you might think to make it searchable.
....

And what we have now is a paper trail, not a registry. Sorry, RVB, but you're flat wrong. Sure it semantics, but, it's a bigger difference than a clip and magazine.

A registry would have S/N tied directly to the current owner. Right now, they have, S/N --> manufacturer ---> distributor -----> dealer ---> dealer (maybe?) ---> an owner (not necessarily the current owner).

Also, there's absolutely no way to look up the other way, i.e. "What guns does (did) RVB own?" A registry would allow for that, a paper trail of gun sales can't.

It's a paper*trail.



* or photograph of paper

 

[rvb]

when did it become law that FFLs had to retain 4473's for 20 years? I thought at first it was 1 year? Did it change or has it always been 20 years? Quick google and I can't find any details....

-rvb

 

[rvb]

And what we have now is a paper trail, not a registry. Sorry, RVB, but you're flat wrong. Sure it semantics, but, it's a bigger difference than a clip and magazine.

A registry would have S/N tied directly to the current owner. Right now, they have, S/N --> manufacturer ---> distributor -----> dealer ---> dealer (maybe?) ---> an owner (not necessarily the current owner).

Also, there's absolutely no way to look up the other way, i.e. "What guns does (did) RVB own?" A registry would allow for that, a paper trail of gun sales can't.

It's a paper*trail.

What information does a 4473 have? Buyer's name + make/model + SN, right? So the data exists, it's just spread around the country and some phone calls ("manufacturer ---> distributor -----> dealer") have to happen to get to it. ATF doesn't maintain a complete registry, they make the dealers do it for them. If an agent walked into your favorite mom and pop shop and said "what all guns has JettaKnight bought here?" do you think they could answer it? How easy or hard that is just depends on the volume the dealer handles and how they organize their data (place I used to work you could look up invoices by name, which had SNs, leading to the 4473).

So you're somewhat right about the reverse look up. That would currently be hard w/o some legwork since some of the data is still at the FFLs and w/o some data entry happening at ATF. But w/in those boxes of 4473s at the ATF, they are maintaining all the necessary information. edit to add: let's not forget about Multiple Sales Reports... those DO tie a name to guns. (ATF Fact Sheet). that's 4.2 million records according to: Wiki. Here is what a Multiple Sales Report looks like: MSR

The line between a full blown actual "registry" and what the ATF is currently doing is so rediculously thin, and they have tiptoed so very very close to it w/o going over, that's it's hard for me not to be concerned that a) it couldn't be misused and b) the existing data couldn't later be easily converted INTO a full-blown registry with the stroke of a legislative pen.

I guess every gun owner but me thinks this is all ok and reasonable, even though this concern was also shared by NRA during the "UBC" discussions.

So if private sales became illegal.... and EVERY gun produced could be traced to a buyer who had to either be in posession of the gun or face a fellony, would you consider that analogous to a registry?

-rvb