4 ms·

It is a matter of law that no digital database of firearms data can be made. The friction is a feature. I'd propose something surrounding license plates, phone

by salawat 11mo ago

It is a matter of law that no digital database of firearms data can be made. The friction is a feature. I'd propose something surrounding license plates, phone info, SIM's and VIN's may be needed. Of course, LE and tax authorities would scream bloody murder, but if we didn't see such flagrant abuse of sensitive identifiers, then maybe they could be trusted with nice things.

cogman10 11mo ago
IDK that I even have a problem with such a database existing (just like I don't really care about a firearms db existing). What I care about is access to the data. It should absolutely require a warrant before it can be accessed. That means the agency that wants to access it needs to prove to a judge that the person they are trying to track has done something wrong or worth invading their privacy over. As it stands, we allow joe bob to access that database so he can harass brown people working on my roof.
- salawat 11mo ago
  No, no, no. >just like I don't really care about a firearms db existing) You might not care, but even before computers were a big thing, and people thought "Computer" and IBM mainframes were synonymous, it was put forth in law that no central digital registry of firearms was to be made available to the Federal Government. View regulations under https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12057 https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12057 In short, NFA, GCA, and FOPA basically synergize to outlaw centralized registries of firearms owners in the U.S. due to the recognition of the particular temptation and value in organizing activities resulting in disarming the populace. It is absolutely the case other identifiers and activity can be restricted to prevent foreseeable abuse, and to be honest, that this type of abuse wasn't foreseen is frankly testament to either our forebearers being comfortable with a surveillance dystopia or just being so disconnected from technical possibilities that they didn't understand the fire we were working with.
  - cogman10 11mo ago
    Any notion of an armed populace doing anything useful to protect freedom has been thoroughly debunked with the current administration. If we can send people to concentration camps without a single armed conflict I can't for the life of me see why anyone would presume guns to have any effect on limiting tyranny. That's why I just can't care about a firearm database being potentially used nefariously. Gun rights have done nothing positive for America.
    - potato3732842 11mo ago
      It's not about the "populace" doing anything at scale. It's about making abusing people under color of law come with a fairly significant chance that there will eventually be a body that was formerly on government payroll that needs to be explained away thereby making such activity much less lucrative. >Gun rights have done nothing positive for America. Despite being 13% of the population black men have been rounded up 0% of the time. There's two ethnic groups that can't say that, well, three depending on how you count.
      - dragonwriter 11mo ago
        > Despite being 13% of the population black men have been rounded up 0% of the time. I'm not familiar with any definition of "rounded up" for which this even remotely approximates reality.
        potato3732842 11mo ago
        They tossed a bunch of Japanese in camps and right now they're going after immigrants real hard. I think if either group had a less docile reputation they'd be gone after far more surgically and in far lower volume.
        dragonwriter 11mo ago
        > They tossed a bunch of Japanese in camps and right now they're going after immigrants real hard. I think if you look at the entire history of the US, you'll find they've been going after Black people real hard the entire time, and that the root of mass incarceration was as a direct replacement for chattel slavery while the ink on the abolition of that institution was still wet, focussed on Black people, who have been vastly disproportionately its target ever since.
- mmooss 11mo ago
  If it exists then people will use it legally and illegally. Sometimes you find out about the illegal activities years later, sometimes you don't.
akerl_ 11mo ago
Isn't the law that the federal government can't create a digital database of firearm ownership? Presumably many FFLs hold records digitally tracking their sales/transfers, as do manufacturers. And several states require firearm registration.
- salawat 11mo ago
  Correct, but FOPA prohibits those records from entering the custody of BATFE/DoJ, and even if handed off, no funding can be provided to digitize them.
potato3732842 11mo ago
The law didn't stop them. The feds made one anyway and used tortured logic to pretend like they didn't. Many states have their own little ones because "hurr durr it's a tax not a registration"

by salawat 11mo ago

cogman10 11mo ago

IDK that I even have a problem with such a database existing (just like I don't really care about a firearms db existing). What I care about is access to the data. It should absolutely require a warrant before it can be accessed. That means the agency that wants to access it needs to prove to a judge that the person they are trying to track has done something wrong or worth invading their privacy over. As it stands, we allow joe bob to access that database so he can harass brown people working on my roof.

salawat 11mo ago
No, no, no. >just like I don't really care about a firearms db existing) You might not care, but even before computers were a big thing, and people thought "Computer" and IBM mainframes were synonymous, it was put forth in law that no central digital registry of firearms was to be made available to the Federal Government. View regulations under https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12057 https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12057 In short, NFA, GCA, and FOPA basically synergize to outlaw centralized registries of firearms owners in the U.S. due to the recognition of the particular temptation and value in organizing activities resulting in disarming the populace. It is absolutely the case other identifiers and activity can be restricted to prevent foreseeable abuse, and to be honest, that this type of abuse wasn't foreseen is frankly testament to either our forebearers being comfortable with a surveillance dystopia or just being so disconnected from technical possibilities that they didn't understand the fire we were working with.
- cogman10 11mo ago
  Any notion of an armed populace doing anything useful to protect freedom has been thoroughly debunked with the current administration. If we can send people to concentration camps without a single armed conflict I can't for the life of me see why anyone would presume guns to have any effect on limiting tyranny. That's why I just can't care about a firearm database being potentially used nefariously. Gun rights have done nothing positive for America.
  - potato3732842 11mo ago
    It's not about the "populace" doing anything at scale. It's about making abusing people under color of law come with a fairly significant chance that there will eventually be a body that was formerly on government payroll that needs to be explained away thereby making such activity much less lucrative. >Gun rights have done nothing positive for America. Despite being 13% of the population black men have been rounded up 0% of the time. There's two ethnic groups that can't say that, well, three depending on how you count.
    - dragonwriter 11mo ago
      > Despite being 13% of the population black men have been rounded up 0% of the time. I'm not familiar with any definition of "rounded up" for which this even remotely approximates reality.
      - potato3732842 11mo ago
        They tossed a bunch of Japanese in camps and right now they're going after immigrants real hard. I think if either group had a less docile reputation they'd be gone after far more surgically and in far lower volume.
        dragonwriter 11mo ago
        > They tossed a bunch of Japanese in camps and right now they're going after immigrants real hard. I think if you look at the entire history of the US, you'll find they've been going after Black people real hard the entire time, and that the root of mass incarceration was as a direct replacement for chattel slavery while the ink on the abolition of that institution was still wet, focussed on Black people, who have been vastly disproportionately its target ever since.
mmooss 11mo ago
If it exists then people will use it legally and illegally. Sometimes you find out about the illegal activities years later, sometimes you don't.

akerl_ 11mo ago

Isn't the law that the federal government can't create a digital database of firearm ownership? Presumably many FFLs hold records digitally tracking their sales/transfers, as do manufacturers. And several states require firearm registration.

salawat 11mo ago
Correct, but FOPA prohibits those records from entering the custody of BATFE/DoJ, and even if handed off, no funding can be provided to digitize them.

potato3732842 11mo ago

The law didn't stop them. The feds made one anyway and used tortured logic to pretend like they didn't. Many states have their own little ones because "hurr durr it's a tax not a registration"