Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Screwing up the Gun Registry

  1. #1
    Regular Member RebeccaC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Owensboro
    Posts
    45

    Talking Screwing up the Gun Registry

    I've been thinking. With Obama winning reelection and Diane Feinstein immediately proposing strict gun control measures THE NEXT DAY, and with the White House saying they are now happy to discuss the UN gun ban treaty, maybe it is time gun owners did something to protect their firearms.
    I don't know if this would solve the problem, but it would surely throw a wrench in things for the government. If the NRA and other Gun Rights organizations started organizing gun swaps at gun shows it could really screw up the gun registry. I know they are doing this in Canada. Maybe at the big gun shows, they could hold swaps as well. For example, I take my Ruger P95, and trade it, anonymously at the gun show, for another P95. Or even a different type gun altogether if both parties agree to an equal trade. The whole point being if enough people do this, we could render gun registry meaningless. Where people may even take a pledge to trade their guns within six months of purchase. Make it so that nobody is actually in possession of the gun that is registered to them. Do you think this would even be possible?

  2. #2
    Regular Member RebeccaC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Owensboro
    Posts
    45
    I know some might say, "well what if someone trades you a gun used in a crime? And somehow the law finds out YOU have it" Beyond being in possession of a gun used in a crime, there are so many other factors needed to prove one guilty it would be almost impossible to convict someone for simply having the gun unless you were trading with someone you knew, family member, etc. Also, if it became common knowledge that gun swaps were common THAT would create serious reasonable doubt. Plus if you could show you were AT a gun swap that right there would create reasonable doubt as to whether you owned the gun when the crime was committed. I am more interested in preventing a Katrina style gun grab down the road when Obamas policies throw this nation into collapse, chaos and ruin. And royally screwing up the registry well in advance of it can only be helpful to law abiding citizens.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I think most state laws require the seller to keep a record of the transaction ...

  4. #4
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Gutshot is right. Kentucky only has a few registered guns, NFA weapons are the only weapons required to be registered (I think). That is due to federal law.


    This is why I get soo pissed off at FFLs in Kentucky willing to "transfer" firearms between two Kentucky residents. Few will tell you the truth. As this is probably good business for them, they don't do anything (really) and charge you 50$ to hand the firearm to the next person and do a simple background check.
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Think the OP is talking about ATF form 4473 ....

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I think most state laws require the seller to keep a record of the transaction ...
    I can't ask for a cite for something like that, but honestly, I think most states DON'T.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  7. #7
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Think the OP is talking about ATF form 4473 ....
    Which should stay at the FFL or their storage facility until they are destroyed. I don't know if the ATF is doing anything with them, but they shouldn't be.
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  8. #8
    Regular Member neuroblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,240
    The BATFE Form 4473 is supposed to stay on-site at the gun shop or gun store and be kept on file until such time as the dealer goes out of business. Then their Form 4473's are sent to the BATFE according to what I've read. This could be incorrect, I'm not an FFL and have no dealings with the BATFE. From my understanding the 4473's are never destroyed, just converted to digital format.

    I do know that sometime back, I had to contact my gun dealer in reference to a sidearm that had been illegally removed from my house and I wasn't immediaely able to locate my paperwork for KSP. They weren't able to give me certain materials but they were able to photocopy documents that proved my legal ownership of the weapon in question though. Luckily, just hours before I was to run down to get the infomation from the dealer, I was able to locate my originals and the issue was resolved without having to involve LE.
    Got SIG? MOLON LABE

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    I think we'd be better off carrying the fight to the enemy.

    I'm of the opinion that NRA argues a lot more against loss of rights than attacking for more rights and restoration of rights already gone. I suspect it makes more money howling about the bogey man, selling doom and danger, than selling enthusiasm to eradicate, for example, the closure of the federal registry to new machine guns.

    Feinstein is open to attack. Her state--and the country--is about to go off the cliff fiscally, and she's spending time and effort on gun legislation? Any federal legislator who spends time on anything besides the economy and fiscal disaster is wide open.

    Then, instead of waiting around to fight anti-gun legislation, the NRA needs to be attacking the existing anti-gun legislation. Start chiseling away at GFSZ's, onerous regulations, etc. Make the anti-gunners defend their position.
    Last edited by Citizen; 11-11-2012 at 06:31 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  10. #10
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by RebeccaC View Post
    I've been thinking. With Obama winning reelection and Diane Feinstein immediately proposing strict gun control measures THE NEXT DAY, and with the White House saying they are now happy to discuss the UN gun ban treaty, maybe it is time gun owners did something to protect their firearms.
    I don't know if this would solve the problem, but it would surely throw a wrench in things for the government. If the NRA and other Gun Rights organizations started organizing gun swaps at gun shows it could really screw up the gun registry. I know they are doing this in Canada. Maybe at the big gun shows, they could hold swaps as well. For example, I take my Ruger P95, and trade it, anonymously at the gun show, for another P95. Or even a different type gun altogether if both parties agree to an equal trade. The whole point being if enough people do this, we could render gun registry meaningless. Where people may even take a pledge to trade their guns within six months of purchase. Make it so that nobody is actually in possession of the gun that is registered to them. Do you think this would even be possible?
    There is no such thing as "registry" at the federal level unless you are speaking of NFA items. There is no "registry" at the state level in Kentucky for any item, NFA or not. Kentucky does not require any registration of NFA items, so the only registration you must complete if you plan to purchase these [NFA] weapons is at the federal level.

    I believe you are speaking of the 4473 that is filled out when you purchase a firearm, but these do nothing but set at a dealer's business for 20 years, or until they go out of business. The 4473 is nothing more than information gathered on the buyer to conduct the Brady background check, and then the type of firearm and serial # are written down and stored away. If you live in a state where it is legal to conduct private transfers, you don't have to get rid of your firearms. If they ever came to your house asking about a particular firearm, then it must have already been sold, because if they have it then it has been used in a crime.

    If you are afraid they are going to gather up all of the 4473s and try to confiscate everyone's firearms, then just tell them you sold them all when they come to get them. I don't think this will be happening anytime soon, but if it did you wouldn't need to be worried about them taking your guns, because we would be to the point where we would need to use them, not worry about losing them.

    Like Heston said: "You can take them from my COLD, DEAD FINGERS!
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  11. #11
    Regular Member RebeccaC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Owensboro
    Posts
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by KYGlockster View Post
    There is no such thing as "registry" at the federal level unless you are speaking of NFA items. There is no "registry" at the state level in Kentucky for any item, NFA or not. Kentucky does not require any registration of NFA items, so the only registration you must complete if you plan to purchase these [NFA] weapons is at the federal level.

    I believe you are speaking of the 4473 that is filled out when you purchase a firearm, but these do nothing but set at a dealer's business for 20 years, or until they go out of business. The 4473 is nothing more than information gathered on the buyer to conduct the Brady background check, and then the type of firearm and serial # are written down and stored away. If you live in a state where it is legal to conduct private transfers, you don't have to get rid of your firearms. If they ever came to your house asking about a particular firearm, then it must have already been sold, because if they have it then it has been used in a crime.

    If you are afraid they are going to gather up all of the 4473s and try to confiscate everyone's firearms, then just tell them you sold them all when they come to get them. I don't think this will be happening anytime soon, but if it did you wouldn't need to be worried about them taking your guns, because we would be to the point where we would need to use them, not worry about losing them.

    Like Heston said: "You can take them from my COLD, DEAD FINGERS!
    It may not be called a Registry, but these exact type records were confiscated from a gun store to determine who bought uppers and lowers for AR-15s. If they are there, they WILL be used if the government decides they want them. Denying this is sheer naivety. I still think botching up the works through gun swaps is a great idea. Would be pointless though if it was not widespread.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    I've never seen an AR upper recorded on a 4473, nor on a dealer's "Bound Book" and if someone paid in cash there wouldn't even be a transaction record.

    And since an AR upper is a Non-Serial Numbered Item, how is someone (ATF, FBI, ABCDEFG) supposed to tell one from another?

  13. #13
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quite true, but if that's the case and it's impossible to tell who has a firearm because the 4473 record stops at the dealer's front door, then you might as well go to random houses and search randomly for firearms.

    I have a feeling that if it ever came down to confiscation that the 'authorities' aren't going to say, "Hey, don't bother with that house there's no record of them ever purchasing a weapon." It's going to be every house, everywhere that gets searched.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Nothern KY
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by gutshot View Post
    I not sure that I understand this whole idea. Tell me where I am going wrong. The feds decide to confiscate your guns and come to your house with all of your 4473's and say, "where are these guns?" and you say, "I sold those guns" and the feds just turn around and walk off, muttering, "Damn, they're too smart for me". Is that how it works? How would it be any different if you did the same thing, but didn't trade any guns and just put your original guns under the mattress? If they aren't going to search your house, what difference does it make? If they do search your house, they will take whatever they find, with or without a 4473, original or traded.
    I was going to make this same comment. OP's plan of action, if he/she wants to remain off ANY transaction log, should be to only purchase with cash and to purchase though private sales. If the person selling the gun asks to record any info (if they even ask to see your ID), just walk away. I'm too worried about because I agree that they would be going door to door IF they ever started a confiscation.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Centertown
    Posts
    20
    I expect a nation wide registry of all firearms sometime in the near future. I don't like the idea but I truly expect it to happen.

    I believe the law will worded in such a way that if you just bring your weapon, (short gun or long gun) to the DMV for example and you will be given a title to that particular firearm. After a reasonable amount of time any weapons that happen to be found and not registered will be confiscated and the owner will suffer a stiff prison term. For a while a person will still be able to purchase a new firearm and will be able to transfer a firearm, but only by going to the DMV to record the transfer. Most people being law abiding citizens will register their firearms. Then when the government is ready they will take what they want. At that point only the government and criminals will have weapons.

    Again I don't like the idea, but I am afraid this is what is in the future.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Quite true, but if that's the case and it's impossible to tell who has a firearm because the 4473 record stops at the dealer's front door, then you might as well go to random houses and search randomly for firearms.

    I have a feeling that if it ever came down to confiscation that the 'authorities' aren't going to say, "Hey, don't bother with that house there's no record of them ever purchasing a weapon." It's going to be every house, everywhere that gets searched.
    INDEED. +1

    And the search and seizure will be carried out by heavily armed folks wearing SWAT gear.

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boone County, KY
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by 56brd View Post
    I expect a nation wide registry of all firearms sometime in the near future. I don't like the idea but I truly expect it to happen.

    I believe the law will worded in such a way that if you just bring your weapon, (short gun or long gun) to the DMV for example and you will be given a title to that particular firearm. After a reasonable amount of time any weapons that happen to be found and not registered will be confiscated and the owner will suffer a stiff prison term. For a while a person will still be able to purchase a new firearm and will be able to transfer a firearm, but only by going to the DMV to record the transfer. Most people being law abiding citizens will register their firearms. Then when the government is ready they will take what they want. At that point only the government and criminals will have weapons.

    Again I don't like the idea, but I am afraid this is what is in the future.
    I think you are correct and on the mark. I have some thoughts I'd like to share after spending time studying their tactics...

    They are pushing like hell to get UBC passed. Ask yourself why is this? Why is Bloomberg spending tons of money for his Mom's group to take their bus tours from State Capitol to State Capitol pitching their UBC. Why is Gabby also making tours to the legislatures from state to state? Why is UBC so important to these people? Because Universal Background Checks are one step toward registration and then confiscation.

    IF UBC passes nationwide. They could make a ruling after that UBC becomes law that all firearms in private hands will have to go through UBC regardless if it will be sold or not or it cannot be sold later on.

    At first the owner will have a choice, if the firearm doesn't go through UBC. Then the owner cannot will it to heirs or sell it at a later date. They will have a cutoff date or amnesty. The owner dies the gun gets forfeited to the government.

    However gun owners who get their firearms passed through UBC will be allowed later on to sell the firearm or pass it to heirs. See? Each firearm will be issued a registration card as "proof that it went through the UBC".


    (Think that is farfetched? Dianne Feinstein proposed exactly that in 2012 right after Newtown. On a bill she was working on from a year before that!)

    They are going to pitch this steaming pile to the public as a way "to protect gun owners" from accusations that the firearms they own are contraband. The registration card title "will be proof that the owner complied with the new law and is able to keep their firearms" (that have registration card certificates).

    Then they will change the law to declare that all firearms that never went through the UBC is now totally contraband and must be forfeited to the government. Even if the owner is still alive...now that earlier exemption is gone. Now it will be that you cannot possess or own that firearm without that 'title of registration card' even if you have no plans to sell it later on or leave it to heirs.

    Then they will change the law again that gun owners must have a personal firearms license in order to hold a registration certificate for a firearm. Now we will have the licensing of owners as well. And then they will tighten restrictions along the way as to who can get licensed.

    Then at a later date, the government will declare that several classes of firearms will have to be forfeited to the government. (Probably after some staged 'false-flag' shooting event bought on by the overuse of SSRI 'medications'). They will use those personal firearms licenses to go after the gun owners and the registration certificate titles to track down the firearms.

    And how would they 'confiscate' personal property? They would do it the same way the IRS does it already. They will use the same legal tactics and forfeiture laws used by the IRS. Everyone knows that the IRS can confiscate cars, houses, bank accounts, garnish wages and seize every kind of property one can think of.

    And no...I am not talking some tin foil harebrained scheme. I have studied their tactics for years. This is why Gabby, Bloomberg and company are making their bus tours from State Capitol to State Capitol pitching their UBC. It is the first step to gun registration and the ultimate end to our freedoms............

    .
    Last edited by Midwest; 06-23-2014 at 10:37 AM.
    I am not a lawyer, I study the history of gun control laws.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northwest Kent County, Michigan
    Posts
    757
    Quote Originally Posted by Midwest View Post
    I think you are correct and on the mark. I have some thoughts I'd like to share after spending time studying their tactics...

    They are pushing like hell to get UBC passed. Ask yourself why is this? Why is Bloomberg spending tons of money for his Mom's group to take their bus tours from State Capitol to State Capitol pitching their UBC. Why is Gabby also making tours to the legislatures from state to state? Why is UBC so important to these people? Because Universal Background Checks are one step toward registration and then confiscation.

    IF UBC passes nationwide. They could make a ruling after that UBC becomes law that all firearms in private hands will have to go through UBC regardless if it will be sold or not or it cannot be sold later on.

    At first the owner will have a choice, if the firearm doesn't go through UBC. Then the owner cannot will it to heirs or sell it at a later date. They will have a cutoff date or amnesty. The owner dies the gun gets forfeited to the government.

    However gun owners who get their firearms passed through UBC will be allowed later on to sell the firearm or pass it to heirs. See? Each firearm will be issued a registration card as "proof that it went through the UBC".


    (Think that is farfetched? Dianne Feinstein proposed exactly that in 2012 right after Newtown. On a bill she was working on from a year before that!)

    They are going to pitch this steaming pile to the public as a way "to protect gun owners" from accusations that the firearms they own are contraband. The registration card title "will be proof that the owner complied with the new law and is able to keep their firearms" (that have registration card certificates).

    Then they will change the law to declare that all firearms that never went through the UBC is now totally contraband and must be forfeited to the government. Even if the owner is still alive...now that earlier exemption is gone. Now it will be that you cannot possess or own that firearm without that 'title of registration card' even if you have no plans to sell it later on or leave it to heirs.

    Then they will change the law again that gun owners must have a personal firearms license in order to hold a registration certificate for a firearm. Now we will have the licensing of owners as well. And then they will tighten restrictions along the way as to who can get licensed.

    Then at a later date, the government will declare that several classes of firearms will have to be forfeited to the government. (Probably after some staged 'false-flag' shooting event bought on by the overuse of SSRI 'medications'). They will use those personal firearms licenses to go after the gun owners and the registration certificate titles to track down the firearms.

    And how would they 'confiscate' personal property? They would do it the same way the IRS does it already. They will use the same legal tactics and forfeiture laws used by the IRS. Everyone knows that the IRS can confiscate cars, houses, bank accounts, garnish wages and seize every kind of property one can think of.

    And no...I am not talking some tin foil harebrained scheme. I have studied their tactics for years. This is why Gabby, Bloomberg and company are making their bus tours from State Capitol to State Capitol pitching their UBC. It is the first step to gun registration and the ultimate end to our freedoms............

    .
    Unfortunately, you are spot-on. Universal Background checks are just the precurser...and yes they WILL lie about their intentions in order to get it passed. Heck, they don't even have to lie for that matter. Once passed, all they have got to do is change their minds ;-0 or just let a new crop of anti-gun politicians take over (i.e. ones that never said 'never'.).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •