New "NICS Denial Notification Act"

[gh1950]

​

The paper ones stay onsite until biz closure, then they are shipped to the FFL Center in Martinsburg, WV (the same folks who do traces).

FWIW, local FFL shipped records back to WV, needed to retrieve serial number for a gun, local PD filed a request, crickets. Local PD didn't give a . . . hoot, and ATF cared even less, Needed one digit from the Serial No.

Why all the discussion from the junior G-men about guns being traced back to them makes me laugh.

 

[Ken Ford]

If it went through NCIs Wouldn’t they know the addresses anyway?

 

[CTS Tactical]

If it went through NCIs Wouldn’t they know the addresses anyway?

You don't give the buyers address on a NICS check. At least not at the moment. I am not sure what this new rule means. It was kind of confusing.

 

[NWSharpshooter]

You don't give the buyers address on a NICS check. At least not at the moment. I am not sure what this new rule means. It was kind of confusing.

Money. It means money. Gonna have to spend a whole bunch of money with federal, state, and local agencies to provide law enforcement with addresses they will never follow up on.

 

[41mag]

Screw em. Yet another reason to buy privately.
I have never been a fear of records to the gov when it comes to ownership.
(I am sure someone will be along to tell me how wrong or bad I am for thinking/feeling this way.)

 

[gh1950]

Money. It means money. Gonna have to spend a whole bunch of money with federal, state, and local agencies to provide law enforcement with addresses they will never follow up on.

I hate to be the outlier here, but I think this is a good thing. It will call the gun control folk's bluff.

The information has always been available to the ATF, all they had to do is show up at the store and ask to see the form.

Since the Gun Control Act of 1968, there have been between 0 and 1 federal prosecutions each year for a felon or otherwise disqualified person attempting to buy a gun.

This one fact shows that increased regulation does not result in increased control - talk about fish in a barrel, you have known felons providing signed forms with a signature, which is a per se crime. NWSharpshooter is right on, in most jurisdictions the response will be a big yawn.

Where the real excitement will come in is where the locals bust somebody after they have received the notice of "proceed", which of course the locals have no way of cross referencing to the original notice.

I can just envision the Chief of some 4 officer department creating a "Clerk for filing and cross referencing FBI denials".

Plus you always have to keep in mind that the error rate for denials, mostly from name confusion, is so high that the FBI has created ITS OWN system to deal with them. God help you if your name is "William Smith".

 

[charlie hotel lima]

From what I was told, there are different vendors for the electronic FFL filings. So, the Govt. allows these companies to do their work ? At what cost to having information collected ?

 

[NWSharpshooter]

I hate to be the outlier here, but I think this is a good thing. It will call the gun control folk's bluff.

The information has always been available to the ATF, all they had to do is show up at the store and ask to see the form.

Since the Gun Control Act of 1968, there have been between 0 and 1 federal prosecutions each year for a felon or otherwise disqualified person attempting to buy a gun.

This one fact shows that increased regulation does not result in increased control - talk about fish in a barrel, you have known felons providing signed forms with a signature, which is a per se crime. NWSharpshooter is right on, in most jurisdictions the response will be a big yawn.

Where the real excitement will come in is where the locals bust somebody after they have received the notice of "proceed", which of course the locals have no way of cross referencing to the original notice.

I can just envision the Chief of some 4 officer department creating a "Clerk for filing and cross referencing FBI denials".

Plus you always have to keep in mind that the error rate for denials, mostly from name confusion, is so high that the FBI has created ITS OWN system to deal with them. God help you if your name is "William Smith".

Logic, reason, facts, those words have no place in this discussion. The government doesn't care about your rights or your guns, to be honest, they don't want your rights or your guns. They want your money and they want power, which is what most legislation is about.

This will have zero effect on crime, and the outcome will mean nothing since facts are irrelevant.

I was recently arguing with someone about the new constitutional carry law and when I gave them the actual text of the law, with the part they were wrong about highlighted proving 100% that what they were saying was incorrect, they still told me that I was wrong, the actual law was wrong, and what they read in an article somewhere was the truth. They can't be reasoned with.

What this will do is give the government an excuse to spend more money, and in a few years when it has no effect, it will be used as an excuse to spend even MORE money on something else that will do nothing but cost taxpayers money.

 

[NWSharpshooter]

From what I was told, there are different vendors for the electronic FFL filings. So, the Govt. allows these companies to do their work ? At what cost to having information collected ?

cost is irrelevant, get back in line and don't ask any more questions.

 

[charlie hotel lima]

We can look back at how it all was a non problem years ago, but times are different. The folks running the show now have a hard outlook at what they want done.