From John Richardson.
InformationWeek On ATF's Gun Tracing System
The second obstacle is legal. The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 forbids BATFE from creating a national database of gun registrations, sales, or owners. This is as it should be. If the BATFE does get around to upgrading the system, it must do so in a way that makes the data available faster but does not create the forbidden database. The article and the comments section do explore some alternatives.
I'm not an IT professional or a computer expert. However, when the BATFE does get around to upgrading their search system, we need to keep on top of it to make sure that they don't surreptitiously develop a gun registry. This is where watching detailed budget requests becomes important. It will provide the clues needed to let us know in advance when BATFE plans to start their upgrade.
7 comments:
Any such lists are already a "data base." If various entities can compare and access these lists, it's already a national data base. They can make it more convenient for themselves, but the cat was out of the bag a long time ago.
They did an end run around that law by funding state agencies who perform the actual BG check to maintain it for them and with the new information sharing laws they get it anyway. They've been doing it for years.I had a copy of the bill but lost it in a pc failure.. dont believe me at your own expense..
Yank lll
Forgive me but honest to God!
Off the shelf software amounting to only hundreds of dollars will accomplish the tasks described more than adequately.
Neither must you have a server farm upgrade all at once, nor will it be cost prohibitive.
They make their own money and have ways of moving it and hiding it that can evade anyone looking for it.
Given who we are dealing with here and their capabilities and ethics, this is already done and hidden for use whenever the time is right. If discovered, the only people who will be punished will be low level, thus providing the necessary cover. Same old story.
I'm not a code writer, but I have friends who are and I know how easy it is to, add to or "patch" programs to fix problems or add a feature/function. If they buy an off the shelf program they may have access to the "source code" as part of their deal, of if it is written specifically for them they will own the source code, either of which makes it a simple matter to patch or modify the program to facilitate a subrosa registration data base. Even if they resist the temptation to break the law, it's only a matter of time till, a law change, or executive order makes such a data base inevitable.
Dr. D III
The company I work for had asked what was my take on going to an electronic ATF gun registry book system. I said no way. Going electronic means the computer (and possibly the entire LAN with all computers)the database sits on becomes an audit-able item. I said it was best to keep writing in ink in paper books than to let them into our system. Besides, in a blink of an eye, they could download the database onto a thumb drive and walk away with the least amount of effort.
No, I want those mother fuckers at ATF to work hard in getting that information.
Bah, they have the lists in various formats already, hidden from easy view. As mentioned, in many cases its the states themselves that has the data. Oregon most certainly does, the state police do the background checks. Look up the David Pyles case in Oregon.
"I'm not an IT professional or a computer expert. However, when the BATFE does get around to upgrading their search system, we need to keep on top of it to make sure that they don't surreptitiously develop a gun registry."
I *am* (ok, was) a computer professional. The above comment is silly. Only a very naive person would believe they don't already have this info stored away. Everything in NICS has been stored. It's not even a difficult thing to do. The law means nothing to the ruling class.
Post a Comment