From Backwoods Home Magazine: 2nd Amendment, the Bill of Rights...long read, but worth it

[AsburySkinsFan]

Bottom line,, do we want to 'enforce current laws' , or is that just lip service?

~Bang

Oooh ooh I know..... Sure hope the teacher calls on me!

[Bang]

Ok I am not entirely sure how this is a bad thing. From what I have read about the amendment in question it allows local, state, and federal law enforcement to access the data as long as it is in connection to a investigation. Not sure how they are handcuffed.

This is similar to other laws that protect personal information. The law prevents private information from being released to people who do not have a legitimate need for it. I am kind of shocked at the outrage to this. People get upset when the government collects information on them like phone calls which can potentially hinder terrorist attacks, but want them to have full access to this information. I guess as long as it fits a particular agenda then it is fine. The only thing I think should be changed is the mandatory inventories. I don't think a mandatory inventory of certain classes of firearms would be to much to ask if it was conducted once a month.

Inventories at bare minimum would go a long way in catching unscrupulous dealers.
This is where the link in the chain of 'criminals get guns" can be damaged.

In order to police current laws, at very minimum this measure needs to be reviewed. it is totally counterproductive, leaves a million holes to slide through.
The Honor System does not work.

~Bang

[twa]

Bottom line,, do we want to 'enforce current laws' , or is that just lip service?

~Bang

The amendment IS current law

[Bang]

The amendment IS current law

So the NRA wants to enable criminals.

Well, at least it's on the table now.

~Bang

[twa]

So the NRA wants to enable criminals.

Well, at least it's on the table now.

~Bang

The information is available to the police and prosecutors in criminal investigations NOW.

Did you mean enable making criminals?

add
http://www.examiner.com/article/what...ahrt-amendment

The data in the Firearms Trace System database is clearly available to law enforcement. In fact, that was what it was created for.

What it is not for is to let anti-gun politicians use this information for their own agendas. The trace data is only useful in direct conjunction with a criminal investigation. Any other use would not yield viable results because of the nature of the data. For example, a trace might be run on a firearm that had nothing to do with a crime, such as to verify a firearm isn't stolen. This would yield a false positive if attempting to use the data out of context on a witch hunt to try to find problems that don't exist.

Hurting the gun grabbers' argument even further is that both the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Fraternal Order of Police want the data to remain restricted to law enforcement. Their primary concerns are that it would jeopardize ongoing investigations and put undercover officers at risk.