13 ms·

Interesting how gun records are forbidden to be computerized. NRA knows how to avoid big brother. http://www.gq.com/story/inside-federal-bureau-of-way-too-many

by rb808 10y ago

Interesting how gun records are forbidden to be computerized. NRA knows how to avoid big brother. http://www.gq.com/story/inside-federal-bureau-of-way-too-many-guns http://www.gq.com/story/inside-federal-bureau-of-way-too-man... >> That's been a federal law, thanks to the NRA, since 1986: No searchable database of America's gun owners. So people here have to use paper, sort through enormous stacks of forms and record books that gun stores are required to keep and to eventually turn over to the feds when requested. It's kind of like a library in the old days—but without the card catalog. They can use pictures of paper, like microfilm (they recently got the go-ahead to convert the microfilm to PDFs), as long as the pictures of paper are not searchable. You have to flip through and read. No searching by gun owner. No searching by name.

whamlastxmas 10y ago
Worth noting that records for people in Texas with a License To Carry are computerized - a cop will know it when they pull you over and run your plates. Not saying this is a bad thing, just worth noting.
- hga 10y ago
  I'm sure that's true in any state with a CCW licensing regime, I know it is in Missouri, which has a system cutely named MULES. But those are set up to deter fishing expeditions, for they contain a lot of sensitive information, such as arrest records as well as charges, convictions, outstanding warrants, etc. More infamously, some states share that info, Florida with Maryland, where travelers have been pulled over and hassled about whether they've got a gun, which due to the FOPA of '86 safe passage protections, probably doesn't even apply when they're just passing through the state (in the case mentioned below, the gun owner has no legal way to possesses it in NJ, so left it behind in his safe). See e.g. http://www.tbo.com/list/columns-tjackson/jackson-gun-owner-unarmed-unwelcome-in-maryland-20140112/ http://www.tbo.com/list/columns-tjackson/jackson-gun-owner-u... which is what a police state looks like.
knz 10y ago
Do we still trust that these types of rules are being followed (particularly in the context of mass surveillance)? If I recall correctly, the public has been told on many occasions that the NSA/FBI/local police were not doing something only to be told years later that this was not the case. Laws such as this just highlight how asinine gun policy can be. Allowing a paper trail but not allowing digital records doesn't really benefit gun owners (Completing a 4473 would be a lot easier if they could verify that you are already a responsible gun owner) or make policing gun laws any safer (straw purchases would be easier to track if the records were digitized).
- ekianjo 10y ago
  > Allowing a paper trail but not allowing digital records doesn't really benefit gun owners I'd say anything making the job of the police a little more tedious is worth bonus points. There is so much asymmetry of power against citizens that such measures restore a little bit of balance. You can't have both Freedom and a super effective police force on the other hand. It's always a trade-off.
  - komali2 10y ago
    Are you an American? Because plenty of countries strike that balance just fine.
    - ekianjo 10y ago
      Care to share examples of said countries ?
    - snerbles 10y ago
      What other cultures consider just fine, many Americans would consider unacceptably collectivist.
      - hackuser 10y ago
        > What other cultures consider just fine, many Americans would consider unacceptably collectivist. It's odd to focus on that one conflict of 'cultures', of the almost infinite possibilities. As one tiny example, some things other cultures do would also seem unacceptably individualistic and lawless.
djsumdog 10y ago
There's a really good short documentary about the current tracing process: https://vimeo.com/180763356 https://vimeo.com/180763356 TL;DR - if a gun shop goes out of business and has and sends the ATF an excel spreadsheet or MySQL database with names and serial numbers, the ATF has to change the data so it's not unsearchable by name (often converting it to PDFs). It's asinine.
- nkw 10y ago
  Actually I find it surprisingly effective. I suppose if you think there should be a large government run searchable database of gun owners then, yes, the process could be "asinine", but if you assume the purpose is to simultaneously provide a framework to trace the transfer of firearms used in crimes while denying the ability of a government agent to hit a few keys on a keyboard and see how many and what kind of guns Joe Q. Public has then it is reasonably effective.
  - logfromblammo 10y ago
    But then again, the same goal might also be achievable using cryptographic trapdoor functions.
    - ptaipale 10y ago
      Track record of governments (U.S. or any other) to keep such databases safe and control the access properly is not very good.
  - jfoutz 10y ago
    First, the notion of 'unsearchable' is asinine. Anything can be searched via linear scan. Anything. The current system is de facto illegal. We have a large searchable database of gun owners, servicing 5500 queries per day. Second, the value of search is, as i'm sure you know, simply how the data is sorted. A pure paper system could take advantage of modern inventory control systems. Just stick each 4473 in an envelope. put a hash code on the envelope. build indexes of relevant information to hash codes, automate or manually store the envelopes. This is also stupid, but clearly feasible. Finally, resources do not imply corruption. It's been shown time and time again. You seem to think the Democratic Republic of the Congo would be a lovely place if they just didn't have all those diamonds and cobalt. Really, because the Congo is corrupt, they put diamonds and cobalt to poor use. I believe you believe it's a good solution. I believe you haven't really thought deeply about the separation of concerns. We ought to have a system that's used ethically and responsibly with whatever safeguards are necessary to keep the system that way. Nobody likes paying taxes, but the IRS seems to do fairly good job of tracking income. You ever have a problem with selective service? Do you think they're secretly trying to draft you specifically as punishment for some imagined slight? The current system doesn't catch people it should. The current system fails to exonerate people it should. The current system creates a ridiculous regulatory burden on tens of thousands of small businesses. The current system is a perfect example of government waste, because we've forced the government to handle the problem in a completely fucking stupid way. edit Just to continue the rant, At the time of sale, generate a UUID. Register the serial number and UUID with the ATF. Register the Name, address and DOB and UUID with the census bureau. With any given investigation, require a judge to get a warrant to get the ATF to release the UUID for a gun. get another warrant to get the name from the census bureau. Pepper the census bureau's data with other UUID's, like tax filing, voter registration, getting farm subsidies, whatever other random stuff is handy. it's just a big map of names to stuff. stuff that has no value in isolation. It requires conspirators in 2 agencies to target individuals, it requires stealing 2 databases to reconstruct useful information. This provides a real separation between guns and people, that can be reconstructed as needed, but requires local authorities to make the connection, and only under judicial review. This not only catches bad guys, it keeps people who did nothing wrong out of jail. The current system ruins innocent people's lives.
StillBored 10y ago
So, then it just takes an OCR step somewhere in the process. But it doesn't really stop the feds from knocking on your door 10 years after you sold the weapon. (this actually happened to a buddy of mine when his gun showed up as one of the "fast and furious" guns, or that was their excuse).
rlucas 10y ago
That's only at the federal level, though. Here in Washington State, a handgun purchased by a permit holder is entered into a state level database which is most certainly computerized. Sadly, I know this because there was a shooting spree just a couple of years ago in my hometown. http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2012/05/police-release-details-of-cafe-racer-and-first-hill-killings/ http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2012/05/police-release-det... The above news blog post has a screen shot of how local cops were able to pull the records on the six legally owned handguns of the (mentally disturbed) murderer. They include serial numbers and purchase dates. So, no, NRA does not know how to avoid big brother. They know how to perpetuate their power and influence by using concentrated voting blocs in a relatively few key congressional districts in order to invent a wedge issue of dubious relevance. But when it comes to having lists of guns in a computer run by a government, that train has sailed. (All that said, there is certainly an effectiveness to what NRA has achieved here. But couldn't we acknowledge that effectiveness and then put in place a distributed crypto / key escrow system that would allow the guns themselves to be tracked by serial / model / dates of transfers, and then with the second keyholder's approval to unlock the names of individuals?)

by rb808 10y ago

whamlastxmas 10y ago

Worth noting that records for people in Texas with a License To Carry are computerized - a cop will know it when they pull you over and run your plates. Not saying this is a bad thing, just worth noting.

hga 10y ago
I'm sure that's true in any state with a CCW licensing regime, I know it is in Missouri, which has a system cutely named MULES. But those are set up to deter fishing expeditions, for they contain a lot of sensitive information, such as arrest records as well as charges, convictions, outstanding warrants, etc. More infamously, some states share that info, Florida with Maryland, where travelers have been pulled over and hassled about whether they've got a gun, which due to the FOPA of '86 safe passage protections, probably doesn't even apply when they're just passing through the state (in the case mentioned below, the gun owner has no legal way to possesses it in NJ, so left it behind in his safe). See e.g. http://www.tbo.com/list/columns-tjackson/jackson-gun-owner-unarmed-unwelcome-in-maryland-20140112/ http://www.tbo.com/list/columns-tjackson/jackson-gun-owner-u... which is what a police state looks like.

knz 10y ago

Do we still trust that these types of rules are being followed (particularly in the context of mass surveillance)? If I recall correctly, the public has been told on many occasions that the NSA/FBI/local police were not doing something only to be told years later that this was not the case. Laws such as this just highlight how asinine gun policy can be. Allowing a paper trail but not allowing digital records doesn't really benefit gun owners (Completing a 4473 would be a lot easier if they could verify that you are already a responsible gun owner) or make policing gun laws any safer (straw purchases would be easier to track if the records were digitized).

ekianjo 10y ago
> Allowing a paper trail but not allowing digital records doesn't really benefit gun owners I'd say anything making the job of the police a little more tedious is worth bonus points. There is so much asymmetry of power against citizens that such measures restore a little bit of balance. You can't have both Freedom and a super effective police force on the other hand. It's always a trade-off.
- komali2 10y ago
  Are you an American? Because plenty of countries strike that balance just fine.
  - ekianjo 10y ago
    Care to share examples of said countries ?
  - snerbles 10y ago
    What other cultures consider just fine, many Americans would consider unacceptably collectivist.
    - hackuser 10y ago
      > What other cultures consider just fine, many Americans would consider unacceptably collectivist. It's odd to focus on that one conflict of 'cultures', of the almost infinite possibilities. As one tiny example, some things other cultures do would also seem unacceptably individualistic and lawless.

djsumdog 10y ago

There's a really good short documentary about the current tracing process: https://vimeo.com/180763356 https://vimeo.com/180763356 TL;DR - if a gun shop goes out of business and has and sends the ATF an excel spreadsheet or MySQL database with names and serial numbers, the ATF has to change the data so it's not unsearchable by name (often converting it to PDFs). It's asinine.

nkw 10y ago
Actually I find it surprisingly effective. I suppose if you think there should be a large government run searchable database of gun owners then, yes, the process could be "asinine", but if you assume the purpose is to simultaneously provide a framework to trace the transfer of firearms used in crimes while denying the ability of a government agent to hit a few keys on a keyboard and see how many and what kind of guns Joe Q. Public has then it is reasonably effective.
- logfromblammo 10y ago
  But then again, the same goal might also be achievable using cryptographic trapdoor functions.
  - ptaipale 10y ago
    Track record of governments (U.S. or any other) to keep such databases safe and control the access properly is not very good.
- jfoutz 10y ago
  First, the notion of 'unsearchable' is asinine. Anything can be searched via linear scan. Anything. The current system is de facto illegal. We have a large searchable database of gun owners, servicing 5500 queries per day. Second, the value of search is, as i'm sure you know, simply how the data is sorted. A pure paper system could take advantage of modern inventory control systems. Just stick each 4473 in an envelope. put a hash code on the envelope. build indexes of relevant information to hash codes, automate or manually store the envelopes. This is also stupid, but clearly feasible. Finally, resources do not imply corruption. It's been shown time and time again. You seem to think the Democratic Republic of the Congo would be a lovely place if they just didn't have all those diamonds and cobalt. Really, because the Congo is corrupt, they put diamonds and cobalt to poor use. I believe you believe it's a good solution. I believe you haven't really thought deeply about the separation of concerns. We ought to have a system that's used ethically and responsibly with whatever safeguards are necessary to keep the system that way. Nobody likes paying taxes, but the IRS seems to do fairly good job of tracking income. You ever have a problem with selective service? Do you think they're secretly trying to draft you specifically as punishment for some imagined slight? The current system doesn't catch people it should. The current system fails to exonerate people it should. The current system creates a ridiculous regulatory burden on tens of thousands of small businesses. The current system is a perfect example of government waste, because we've forced the government to handle the problem in a completely fucking stupid way. edit Just to continue the rant, At the time of sale, generate a UUID. Register the serial number and UUID with the ATF. Register the Name, address and DOB and UUID with the census bureau. With any given investigation, require a judge to get a warrant to get the ATF to release the UUID for a gun. get another warrant to get the name from the census bureau. Pepper the census bureau's data with other UUID's, like tax filing, voter registration, getting farm subsidies, whatever other random stuff is handy. it's just a big map of names to stuff. stuff that has no value in isolation. It requires conspirators in 2 agencies to target individuals, it requires stealing 2 databases to reconstruct useful information. This provides a real separation between guns and people, that can be reconstructed as needed, but requires local authorities to make the connection, and only under judicial review. This not only catches bad guys, it keeps people who did nothing wrong out of jail. The current system ruins innocent people's lives.

StillBored 10y ago

So, then it just takes an OCR step somewhere in the process. But it doesn't really stop the feds from knocking on your door 10 years after you sold the weapon. (this actually happened to a buddy of mine when his gun showed up as one of the "fast and furious" guns, or that was their excuse).

rlucas 10y ago

That's only at the federal level, though. Here in Washington State, a handgun purchased by a permit holder is entered into a state level database which is most certainly computerized. Sadly, I know this because there was a shooting spree just a couple of years ago in my hometown. http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2012/05/police-release-details-of-cafe-racer-and-first-hill-killings/ http://www.capitolhillseattle.com/2012/05/police-release-det... The above news blog post has a screen shot of how local cops were able to pull the records on the six legally owned handguns of the (mentally disturbed) murderer. They include serial numbers and purchase dates. So, no, NRA does not know how to avoid big brother. They know how to perpetuate their power and influence by using concentrated voting blocs in a relatively few key congressional districts in order to invent a wedge issue of dubious relevance. But when it comes to having lists of guns in a computer run by a government, that train has sailed. (All that said, there is certainly an effectiveness to what NRA has achieved here. But couldn't we acknowledge that effectiveness and then put in place a distributed crypto / key escrow system that would allow the guns themselves to be tracked by serial / model / dates of transfers, and then with the second keyholder's approval to unlock the names of individuals?)