Admitting that the 4473 is registration, or media incompetence?

[Kimber45acp]

In the case of the nutty professor with the past that includes the "accidental" blasting of her brother in 1986 with a shotgun (three shots fired), the media is including this GEM with respect to the firearm she used on campus the other day (which of course violated the "no guns" policy, but they're not mentioning THAT):

Police say the gun she's accused of using in the Alabama shooting wasn't registered, and investigators don't know how or where she got it.

In news story after news story, the media keeps saying that her gun "wasn't registered," but by now, even the idiots in the media know that Alabama has no gun registration. SO, is this an admission that the 4473 (which they cannot find for this gun) is registration (since they can now use the 4473 to trace a gun to you in a matter of hours)?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100215/ap_on_re_us/us_ala_university_shooting

Does anyone know what model/brand of gun she used? The media is staying mum on that for some reason. Since they're not calling it an "assault pistol," I suspect she used a revolver.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

It's an admission that the Alabama police spokesman from whom the paraphrase was received, is either an idiot or a malevolent deceiver, because he/she thinks there IS registration in Alabama, even though he/she lives there and is ya know, a police officer, who is supposed to know the law.

 

[Kimber45acp]

I'm sure the police spokesperson AND many reporters are either ignorant or intentionally repeating the "registration" nonsense to convince the public that registration exists in states where it doesn't, BUT, the police seem to be shocked that there's no 4473 in this case, no de facto registration paper trail. The way it is coming across, it is as if the police view the 4473 as de facto registration and they are essentially saying "we cannot locate registration documentation for this firearm."

We've all seen news stories where the term "registration" is thrown around inaccurately, but in THIS one, the police are acting surprised that they cannot quickly determine who this gun is "registered" to like they normally do. I think they are so used to behaving as if the 4473 is a full blown registration form, that it is showing through in this case.

 

[Legionnaire]

Since they're not calling it an "assault pistol," I suspect she used a revolver.

Lots of references to a 9mm handgun, so probably not a revolver. Haven't been able to dig up anything else yet, though.

 

[russ69]

The statement sounds true to me, the gun wasn't registered and the police don't know when and where she got it. That sounds good to me. They will find out more info later when they trace the serial number, back to the distributor/dealer/first sale owner. Unless it's changed hands a number of times they will track it down.

Thanx, Russ

 

[Kimber45acp]

They will find out more info later when they trace the serial number, back to the distributor/dealer/first sale owner.

Maybe you're not aware that they are able to do this within a day or two. They've already TRIED to trace the serial number. This is my whole point. They can trace guns so quickly now, that the 4473 is de facto registration to the point that cops flat out see the 4473 as a registration tool. In nearly every high profile case, we know where the gun was bought and who bought it, within a day or two. We're now well into day FOUR.

 

[Mags]

All non gunnies think guns are registered. My dad who was visiting seen a black BB gun in the corner of a closet and screamed "oh my god an assault rifle! do you have the proper permits and registration? " You should've seen his reaction when he seen my AR15 later that day.

 

[Aaron Baker]

I read a few articles, but what I keep seeing is references to not having a "permit." The wikipedia entry specifically states that she didn't have a concealed carry permit, which is the only permit that would have been required for concealed carrying a gun into a building.

Nevermind that it's probably a "gun-free zone" and a permit wouldn't have made it legal.

Aaron

 

[captainmarko]

Never mind that she shot and KILLED her brother in '86. Read up on that one and it starts to become clear that she wasn't wrapped too tight going way back. This latest tragedy is simply the decoration on an already baked and iced fruitcake. Just my .02.

 

[jim147]

Of cause the media is wrong in their use of the term registered.

People do seem to forget that 9mm pistols have been around longer then 4473's or even serial numbers. It may be the case here.

jim

 

[dogtown tom]

I have several customers who are members here at THR. More than one has asked about "registration" of firearms in Texas. I get asked that question about twice a week.

Last week I get a call: "My brother gave me a gun for my birthday, how do I get the gun out of my brothers name, into mine?".

Before we skewer the media and police on this one all we need to do is look at how many similiar questions come from THR.

The general public (inc. the media and police) get quite a bit of their supposed firearms knowledge from TV and film. Being that most cops & robbers TV shows and movies are set (and filmed) in New York or Los Angeles AND their scripts reflect those states firearms laws, is it any wonder how they assume gun registration is the same all over?

 

[Bubba613]

Maybe you're not aware that they are able to do this within a day or two. They've already TRIED to trace the serial number. This is my whole point. They can trace guns so quickly now, that the 4473 is de facto registration to the point that cops flat out see the 4473 as a registration tool. In nearly every high profile case, we know where the gun was bought and who bought it, within a day or two. We're now well into day FOUR.

This is simply misinformation.

There are only two ways a trace request will trace the firearm.
1) She bought a new gun from a dealer. In that case ATF will contact the manufacturer/importer and trace the gun from them to the distributor to the retailer who will check his books and find where he disposed of the gun.
2) She bought the gun along with another handgun within 5 days from the same dealer and the dealer filed a multiple sale report with ATF.

Absent those two things there is no way to trace the gun. If she bought the gun used from a dealer, there is no way to trace it. If she bought the gun from another individual, there is no way to trace it.

 

[dogtown tom]

Bubba613 nailed it.

 

[Kimber45acp]

ATF has every serial number of every firearm imported or manufactured because every importer and manufacturer must record each one. This is simply a fact. We also know they have the serial number of the firearm she used. ERGO, their lack of ability to tie this particular firearm to her (via paperwork) is the result of a lack of only one thing: a 4473.

I have spoken to FFLs who get trace requests from ATF. Request is putting is nicely because it's more of a demand. I watched an FFL friend spend hours of their OWN TIME digging out 4473s so as to comply with a trace request. ATF expects these dealers to provide information immediately. You can BET that ATF has already hounded every dealer in this woman's area, and since no 4473 has surfaced, she either bought it privately or at some non local dealer. My whole point is that the 4473 ties us all to our firearms whether we like it or not, and in trace situations like this, digging up the 4473 USUALLY happens quite quickly, quicker than we would like to think. There have been some local crimes on the news where it has amazed me how quickly they figured out which dealer sold a gun, and to whom. It is only slightly slower than full blown registration.

 

[D94R]

What's it matter if there's a 4473 form tying her to the gun? I'm kinda confused on what the argument about not being able to find one is anyhow. The only thing the 4473 will do is show who the gun was sold to new from a dealer and/or who it was sold to used from a dealer. It could have been sold 20 times over, after originally being sold from the dealer, at which point, nothing is going to tie her to the hand gun other than the word of the 19 people who owned the gun before her. And the ATF tracking the selling order all of those people would be damn near impossible. All the serial number is going to produce is the 4473 for the sale from the dealers. All sales after that aren't recorded.



Or maybe you guy's are focusing on the point that the media/law enforcement are crying about not being able to find the 4473 and can't do a "registered trace" on the gun???? I don't know, I'm tired and can't read into it enough to tell if some of you are worried that the ATF can't trace the gun because there is no 4473 to be found (like you're implying there should be one), or if you're happy there is no 4473 to be found that way the gun hasn't been psuedo registered....

 

[GunsAmerica Fan]

A large amount of guns dead end on the 4473 paper trail. That doesn't mean that the police won't find the last 4473 and ask them where the gun went.

Something many people don't know as well is that when we went from 300k FFL dealers to the around 50k today, all those bound books were digitized and made searchable for law enforcement. 20 years ago we all had a friend who was an FFL, or we were one ourselves. I was one, and I kept a bound book to get me and my friends guns at close to real distributor prices, from places like Davidsons and Jerrys, that don't require a storefront picture. Every single one of those guns is now catalogued to there owner in BATF computers.

It is defactco gun registration, and we had power for many years under W and nobody got rid of it, or did anything else to take back our 2nd Amendment rights that we had already lost. It is disgusting.

Today many many many gun dealers are using electronic bound books, so the data is digitized from the outset.

That is why everyone here should take these people who are misinformed about guns and gun registration shooting, and help them get involved in our passion. We need more voters with passion about the 2nd Amendment and shooting sports in general. We need to take it back!

 

[Bubba613]

ATF has every serial number of every firearm imported or manufactured because every importer and manufacturer must record each one. This is simply a fact. We also know they have the serial number of the firearm she used. ERGO, their lack of ability to tie this particular firearm to her (via paperwork) is the result of a lack of only one thing: a 4473.

I have spoken to FFLs who get trace requests from ATF. Request is putting is nicely because it's more of a demand. I watched an FFL friend spend hours of their OWN TIME digging out 4473s so as to comply with a trace request. ATF expects these dealers to provide information immediately. You can BET that ATF has already hounded every dealer in this woman's area, and since no 4473 has surfaced, she either bought it privately or at some non local dealer. My whole point is that the 4473 ties us all to our firearms whether we like it or not, and in trace situations like this, digging up the 4473 USUALLY happens quite quickly, quicker than we would like to think. There have been some local crimes on the news where it has amazed me how quickly they figured out which dealer sold a gun, and to whom. It is only slightly slower than full blown registration.

This is simply filled with half-truths.
First, if she did not buy the gun from a dealer then there is no 4473. Second, if she bought it from a dealer in another state, used, then there is no way to find the 4473 unless there is some miracle moment. If she bought it used from a dealer in AL there is no way to trace it without going back through every entry in the bound books. And that can be very very time consuming. And without much point.
Second, yes it is a request. But dealers understand they will be requested for this information going into it. It is one of the terms of the license.
You do not know whether ATF has "hounded" every dealer in the area. I would bet not. There would be no point to it. When Steve McNair was killed there was some question where the woman got her gun. She was under 21 so it was a good bet she did not get one from a licensed dealer. I never heard from ATF, nor did any other dealer I spoke with. The only hounding I got was from a Baltimore reporter who thought somehow laws here were laxer than other places and an under-age person could easily fake his way into a gun at a dealers.
The notion that the 4473 is "registration" is simply paranoia. The information on the form becomes obsolete so quickly it is a wonder we have to keep them for so long.

 

[Bubba613]

Something many people don't know as well is that when we went from 300k FFL dealers to the around 50k today, all those bound books were digitized and made searchable for law enforcement.

I would love to see some proof of this.
250k dealers over 20 years will generate about 10million of the standard 25 page bound books (I fill up about 2 bound books a year and I am a small dealer). Add to that there is no standardization required: as long as the relevant information is present the format is up to the dealer. So the "books" (and they can be looseleaf books or spiral notebooks) cannot be simply scanned in and the information searchable. In addition, after even 1 or 2 years most of that information is obsolete. People move. People die. People get married. People get divorced. People sell or trade their guns. All the 4473 can show is that the person had possession of the gun at some point in time.
So the benefit of making the information seachable and "available to law enforcement" (paging Tiahrt) is minimal, certainly not worth the man hours required.

 

[navyretired 1]

I know when ATF started digitizing closed down dealer 4473's the NRA filed a law suit in federal court that they were violating federal law. The court forced ATF to cease the copying and destroy data base. ATFE are allowed to store closed shop 4473 but not computerizing.
I've never had ATF call and ask for record info although they might now. They used to show up with a search warrant for records on specific guns by serial number, then they would search big book for saleand then find 4473 in files and make a copy while never taking original from store.
It's been a few years since I've worked where there was a search but I haven't heard of a change.

 

[Legionnaire]

From this morning's Chronicle of Higher Education. If she indeed used a borrowed gun, what might the liability be of the person who loaned it to her? A 4473 would be irrelevant in this case, except possibly to identify the actual owner--and then again, only if the gun was purchased from a dealer.

February 15, 2010, 04:12 PM ET

Husband of Accused Killer Says Wife Went to Shooting Range
By Thomas Bartlett and Robin Wilson

Huntsville, Ala. -- The biology professor at the University of Alabama at Huntsville accused of shooting three of her colleagues to death at a faculty meeting last week had apparently borrowed the handgun from someone she knew, and had been to an indoor shooting range a couple of weeks before the killings, according to her husband.

Amy Bishop's husband, James Anderson, told both The Chronicle and The New York Times on Sunday that the family did not own a gun. But in an interview with The Chronicle today, he acknowledged that she had borrowed a gun, though he wasn't sure from whom. "She was very cagey and didn't say," he said.

Mr. Anderson said he had told his wife he didn't want the gun around the house because of their children, who range in age from 8 to 18. "Get rid of it," he recalled telling her. "I didn't want to have it. I didn't feel we needed it."

Ms. Bishop, according to her husband, had borrowed the gun and was considering buying it. Last summer, he said, someone followed her across the campus. "She was worried about crazy students," he said. Mr. Anderson said had he warned his wife: "OK, but you can't carry it to work."

He told her that, if she had any concerns late at night, he would pick her up from the campus.

Mr. Anderson said he had gone with his wife to an indoor shooting range once, a couple of weeks ago. He said she had been there at least once before with a friend ...

 

[22-rimfire]

Eventuallly the BATF gets every bound book. What they do with the information is a guess on my part. The government has been digitizing many of their documents. I would assume that these may be digitized as well. This is not registration.

I don't view the 4473 as "registration". But the NICs check info could very easily be placed into a database for permanent retrival of information. I understand that "registration" is illegal, but a "registry" is not. PA has a registry. A registry is essentially a list. I would bet that the BATF has a similar list.

 

[jaysouth]

22-rimfire

You finally nailed it.

The BATFE has no idea of where the surrendered 4473 forms are except "in the warehouse"

they are not catalogued, digitized or even indexed. There is a mountain of boxes of every description containing who knows what. It is not a data base that can be readily used. The backlog of indexing these records is now multi decades.

The NICS however, (if data based) would be a more reliable source of sales info for a gov agency.

The task of tracing a firearm is easy if it belongs the original purchaser from a licensed dealer.

I know individuals who buy and sell a gun a week. They are not dealers, merely squirrels that like guns. These guns are not sold back to dealers. They go to friends and strangers alike. After a year or two, it is impossible to remember to whom the gun was sold.

Then you have the case of someone who buys and sells a number of firearms then moves half way across the country. He buys locally(legally, he's a resident now) and he sells locally(legally). His guns find their way into the hands of other like minded individuals who buy and sell, all without the blessing of a licensed dealer.

After a gun changes hands three or four times in the above sceanario, it is untracable.

I personally have a handgun that was legally purchased in NY by a cop. He moved to FLA, then died, his son sold it to a neighbor. The neighbor later moved to VA and sold it to a friend. Friend needed the money and sold it at a gun show. I bought it at the show. Two years later I moved to another state.

If that gun showed up inside yellow tape, do you think it could be traced? To anybody except the deceased original purchaser?

 

[TX1911fan]

Bubba613, I think you are correct to a certain point, but even if someone buys a used gun from a dealer, there has to be a 4473 completed. However, the individual who sells it to that dealer would not have completed a 4473, so that is where the breakdown would occur. Assuming LE could trace a gun all the way to the owner before he sold it to the pawn shop, if that guy can't remember where he sold it, then the trail ends there, unless the pawn shop examines their books and comes up with it on their own.

 

[22-rimfire]

Private party sales between individuals is where gun tracing breaks down. However, I would guess that a gun may infact be sold to a dealer after several private transactions where there is no official record. This is why PA now requires most handgun sales or transfers to be handled through a FFL dealer to create the paper trail and to have the NICs check done on the buyer. I'm originally from PA, and I was very vocal about this topic when the law changed. It fell on deaf ears as folks there just said things like... "so you don't care if your gun is sold to a criminal....." Of course I care. But the discussion ended. Do you actually think criminals care what the "law" is?

 

[texas bulldog]

why do the cops in this case care if the gun was "registered" to her? the only usefulness to the police for registration (other than confiscation, of course) is when the have the murder weapon but not the suspect. they can then follow the "registration" trail in an attempt to identify the shooter.

in this case, they have the shooter and the weapon. who gives a rat's patootey whether it was registered to her or not? how is that a material fact? she's sick. she killed people. she's done this before and gotten away with it. lock her up and throw away the key. where's the confusion?