You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Would anyone know last time BATF were sued over stockpiled 4473s?
- Thread starter zukiphile
- Start date
Aguila Blanca
Staff
What do you mean by "stockpiled" 4473s?
4473s are retained by the FFL, not the BATFE. If the FFL goes out of business, then the 4473s are turned over to the BATFE, and there is nothing in the law that prohibits them from then retaining the forums in perpetuity. What is there that anyone could sue the BATFE over (regarding 4473s)?
4473s are retained by the FFL, not the BATFE. If the FFL goes out of business, then the 4473s are turned over to the BATFE, and there is nothing in the law that prohibits them from then retaining the forums in perpetuity. What is there that anyone could sue the BATFE over (regarding 4473s)?
Spats McGee
Administrator
Got any more details? State? Plaintiff? I'm glad to see if I can hunt it down.
Spats said:Got any more details? State? Plaintiff? I'm glad to see if I can hunt it down.
I really don't. More an annoyingly incomplete memory, an itch I couldn't reach.
Closest I can find is NRA v reno, though if it exists, ...
I think that scratches it. I have a vague memory of a spot in American rifleman showing a pallett of boxed yellows.
This pertains to a casual conversation about the ATF previously having failed to comply with the GCA prohibition on retaining records.
Many thanks all.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
What law prevents the BATFE from holding onto old 4473s turned over by defunct FFLs? The GCA prohibits retaining information from background checks, but I don't believe it addresses old 4473s. What would be the point of requiring an FFL to turn over 25-year-old 4473s if the only thing the BATFE could (legally) do with them is destroy them when they receive them? Why not just allow the FFLs to discard them and save a lot of fuss and bother?
I'm not saying that I like the idea of the BATFE having all those records, I'm just saying that I don't understand how under current laws their having them is a violation of anything.
I'm not saying that I like the idea of the BATFE having all those records, I'm just saying that I don't understand how under current laws their having them is a violation of anything.
Last edited:
scrubcedar
New member
I think I found a couple of links having to do with this.
The district court ruling.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/DC/995270a.html
Some explanation of what's involved.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/rpt/2011-R-0074.htm
Here is an article that references a SCOTUS ruling.
http://epic.org/privacy/firearms/
And the excerpt itself.
"In June 2001, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that the Department of Justice would reduce the amount of time the FBI could retain the records of a gun purchaser's NICS check to just one business day, from the pervious 90-day plan. Ashcroft announced this policy three days after the U.S. Supreme Court denied the NRA's request for the immediate destruction of these records. The NRA had sued to force the immediate destruction of records, arguing that it was necessary in order to maintain the privacy of gun owners. Some have assumed that Ashcroft was induced by the NRA, claiming that the NRA contributed more to Ashcroft than to any other senate candidate when Ashcroft ran for re-election to the Senate from Missouri in 2000."
Frustratingly, I can't find the SCOTUS ruling itself. Medical research is my thing. Can anyone else track it down with these clues?
The district court ruling.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/DC/995270a.html
Some explanation of what's involved.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/rpt/2011-R-0074.htm
Here is an article that references a SCOTUS ruling.
http://epic.org/privacy/firearms/
And the excerpt itself.
"In June 2001, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that the Department of Justice would reduce the amount of time the FBI could retain the records of a gun purchaser's NICS check to just one business day, from the pervious 90-day plan. Ashcroft announced this policy three days after the U.S. Supreme Court denied the NRA's request for the immediate destruction of these records. The NRA had sued to force the immediate destruction of records, arguing that it was necessary in order to maintain the privacy of gun owners. Some have assumed that Ashcroft was induced by the NRA, claiming that the NRA contributed more to Ashcroft than to any other senate candidate when Ashcroft ran for re-election to the Senate from Missouri in 2000."
Frustratingly, I can't find the SCOTUS ruling itself. Medical research is my thing. Can anyone else track it down with these clues?
Spats McGee
Administrator
Possibility: National Rifle Association v. Reno, 216 F.3d 122, 342 U.S.App.D.C. 231 (2000).
Apparently, it is routine for the federal government to ask FFLs for photocopies of their records.
The law is clear on this. No permanent record (paper or electronic) is to be retained by the feds.
Apparently, when an FFL calls in a background check the government keeps the information for 30 days. This is also not in compliance with the law.
It was a bad idea in 1994 for background checks and it is a bad idea in 2013.
The government will always try to misuse this information.
The law is clear on this. No permanent record (paper or electronic) is to be retained by the feds.
Apparently, when an FFL calls in a background check the government keeps the information for 30 days. This is also not in compliance with the law.
It was a bad idea in 1994 for background checks and it is a bad idea in 2013.
The government will always try to misuse this information.
Evan Thomas
New member
Can you give us a source for this statement?Apparently, when an FFL calls in a background check the government keeps the information for 30 days.
Spats McGee
Administrator
As for current law:
"Audit log means a chronological record of system (computer) activities that enables the reconstruction and examination of the sequence of events and/or changes in an event." 28 C.F.R. § 25.2
So that's current law, but I, too am curious as to a source for the claimed 30-day retention practice.
28 C.F.R. § 25.9(b) The FBI will maintain an automated NICS Audit Log of all incoming and outgoing transactions that pass through the system.
(1) Contents. The NICS Audit Log will record the following information: Type of transaction (inquiry or response), line number, time, date of inquiry, header, message key, ORI or FFL identifier, and inquiry/response data (including the name and other identifying information about the prospective transferee and the NTN).
(i) NICS Audit Log records relating to denied transactions will be retained for 10 years, after which time they will be transferred to a Federal Records Center for storage;
(ii) NICS Audit Log records relating to transactions in an open status, except the NTN and date, will be destroyed after not more than 90 days from the date of inquiry; and
(iii) In cases of NICS Audit Log records relating to allowed transactions, all identifying information submitted by or on behalf of the transferee will be destroyed within 24 hours after the FFL receives communication of the determination that the transfer may proceed. All other information, except the NTN and date, will be destroyed after not more than 90 days from the date of inquiry.
"Audit log means a chronological record of system (computer) activities that enables the reconstruction and examination of the sequence of events and/or changes in an event." 28 C.F.R. § 25.2
So that's current law, but I, too am curious as to a source for the claimed 30-day retention practice.
scrubcedar
New member
From the epic.org article in my post above.
"President Clinton Reduces Retention of Brady Checks to 90 days: In April of 2000, President Bill Clinton reduced the amount of time that Brady background check records could be retained by federal officials from 180 days to 90 days, increasing the privacy protection of gun purchasers. This policy was to go into effect in June 2001.
Department of Justice Reduces Retention of Brady Checks to 24 hours: In 2001, the Department of Justice reduced the amount of time federal officials are permitted to retain Brady background check records on gun purchasers from 90 days to just 24 hours.
ATF moved to the Department of Justice: Under the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the ATF is moved from an agency within the Department of the Treasury to and agency within the Department of Justice."
I can pretty much guarantee the article above is out of date. I can't imagine the Obama administration following the same rules as the Bush administration on this particular subject.
"President Clinton Reduces Retention of Brady Checks to 90 days: In April of 2000, President Bill Clinton reduced the amount of time that Brady background check records could be retained by federal officials from 180 days to 90 days, increasing the privacy protection of gun purchasers. This policy was to go into effect in June 2001.
Department of Justice Reduces Retention of Brady Checks to 24 hours: In 2001, the Department of Justice reduced the amount of time federal officials are permitted to retain Brady background check records on gun purchasers from 90 days to just 24 hours.
ATF moved to the Department of Justice: Under the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the ATF is moved from an agency within the Department of the Treasury to and agency within the Department of Justice."
I can pretty much guarantee the article above is out of date. I can't imagine the Obama administration following the same rules as the Bush administration on this particular subject.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
That pertains to background checks. Please cite the actual law that shows this also applies to 4473s from defunct FFLs. If you know the law is clear, then you must be able to cite the law.rajbcpa said:The law is clear on this. No permanent record (paper or electronic) is to be retained by the feds.
Evan Thomas
New member
Why not? President Bush supported both universal background checks and renewal of the original assault weapons ban; he was prepared to sign the latter if Congress had passed it. See this recent article, and this one from 2004.scrubcedar said:I can't imagine the Obama administration following the same rules as the Bush administration on this particular subject.
If you look at the current version of those rules (available on the ATF website), you'll find that the 24-hour limit for retention of background check information is still in place.
scrubcedar
New member
Vanya, I can't find the specific reference in the link you provided but I have no reason to doubt you. I am a little surprised though, considering that he could lengthen the retention time, that he hasn't.