PDA

View Full Version : What do they know about my long guns today?


Nate74
12-26-2012, 1:00 PM
If I understand correctly, AB 809 means the CA-DOJ will start collecting and saving information on long gun purchases on 1/1/14. But all this talk about a potential AWB of some form has me wondering, what do they know about my long guns today? I don't understand the difference between "registered" (as in AB 809) and all the other paperwork I'm currently required to complete when purchasing a long gun.

If I bought an OLL three years ago, is that in a file somewhere? Obviously, they don't know if it's a 9mm, 5.56, .22lr, 16", 20", etc. today, but does anybody in the CA-DOJ or anywhere have a file that says I bought the OLL?

Lastly, what about free states like AZ and TX. I've been with friends in both states when they purchased long guns. And I don't think there's any form of long-term information kept there at all. Is that correct?

To be clear, if a law is passed saying I need to submit to registration for any of my weapons, I would happily do it for the ones not lost to the sea...

paul0660
12-26-2012, 1:07 PM
Long gun info is kept at the FFL, and is accessible if they want it. All the big database knows is there was a long gun transaction from or to you on a date, and who the FFL was.

Long gun sales to or from C&R holders are noted in their "bound book" (which doesn't have to be bound, or a book) and is not in the big database unless the BB has been copied during an inspection. The BB can be thrown away at the end of the license duration.

Undocumented transfers between California residents are unknown to the big database unless work is done to track down earlier transactions of the other types, and testimony from the undocumented buyer or seller is gathered.

If you have authorized a LEO to inspect your guns and note serial numbers, the big database may know.

Nate74
12-26-2012, 1:13 PM
Long gun info is kept at the FFL, and is accessible if they want it. All the big database knows is there was a long gun transaction from or to you on a date, and who the FFL was.


:( So they know that Nate74 bought an OLL on XX/XX/09 and hasn't sold it? Should make the no-knock searches much easier for them I guess...

Thanks for the clarification.

paul0660
12-26-2012, 1:17 PM
So they know that Nate74 bought an OLL on XX/XX/09 and hasn't sold it?

You could have sold it to an out of state party, through a out of state FFL, and they won't know until you file a no longer in possession form. Same for boating accidents.

They know you bought some long gun, not a OLL unless they go to the FFL and examine the file.

Seen the original Red Dawn? It's all in there.

Uxi
12-26-2012, 1:24 PM
I'm only doing 80% receivers from now on excepting a few specifics. Gonna do another Garand/receiver from CMP to do some SAGE on it, for ex. And I still want a S&W 625... but other than that...

OleCuss
12-26-2012, 1:27 PM
With all the data mining going on and the feds essentially vacuuming our e-mails, you should assume that they know exactly what you have.

And if you choose to have a "boating accident" and then keep buying ammo for the firearm which was "lost" they are going to make it very difficult for you in court.

The obvious out is to buy a second and/or third firearm chambered for that round so that when one firearm is lost you still have a reason for purchasing the ammo.

I don't think any of us are ready to go quite that far. If you are, don't tell us.

paul0660
12-26-2012, 1:40 PM
And if you choose to have a "boating accident" and then keep buying ammo for the firearm which was "lost" they are going to make it very difficult for you in court.

Difficult if one is a blabbermouth, no problem otherwise. But, point taken.

As far as data mining goes, I don't think it is a factor until a serious crime is committed and the focus is narrowed a LOT. But, point taken.

Paranoia is one of those things that can be laughable and valid at the same time.

frankm
12-26-2012, 1:48 PM
Like others have said. You must assume they know. I've personally seen computerized records of weapons I bought in the early 80's.

Manolito
12-26-2012, 1:49 PM
I would guess if the data exists it will end up in my Local newspaper. I have a lot of things I collected from 65 to 85 will I have to register them in 2013?

Thanks and sorry if this is a thread jack.

Bill

Nate74
12-26-2012, 1:56 PM
I would guess if the data exists it will end up in my Local newspaper. I have a lot of things I collected from 65 to 85 will I have to register them in 2013?

Thanks and sorry if this is a thread jack.

Bill

AB 809 takes effect in 2014. No AWB has even been proposed, just threatened at this point so nothing is looming for certain in 2013.

paul0660
12-26-2012, 1:58 PM
I have a lot of things I collected from 65 to 85 will I have to register them in 2013?

If Frankm is right you will get a letter telling you to do so. Right?

Davidwhitewolf
12-26-2012, 2:59 PM
...The obvious out is to buy a second and/or third firearm chambered for that round so that when one firearm is lost you still have a reason for purchasing the ammo.

Dude! I am using that line with the wife for our next gun purchases. "Well, really, honey, you should get a second one for me because..."

[QUOTE=OleCuss;10020435 don't think any of us are ready to go quite that far.[/QUOTE]

Au contraire, I know more than one fellow who's stepped over that line, although perhaps not with that particular justification in mind. Well, maybe in the back of their minds.

Manolito
12-26-2012, 3:26 PM
Thanks Nate I typed 2013 while my mind saw 2014. I don't own any semi auto rifles other than 22. All are bolt or single shot picked up when things were a lot cheaper and things were traded at the local range. So now that I have corrected my error will I have to register them in 2014 under 809 or will only the new ones need to be registered? Any help would be appreciated.

Just a side note in 1966 -67-68 I was allowed to carry a M-16 or an M-14 I chose the m-14 I did not like the 5.56 then and so I never bought one in the civillian market having said that I believe it is the right of every citizen in good standings right to bear arms. There were many calibers and designs when the constitution was written and the amendments were accepted and they didn't say squirrel guns only no 50 caliber weapons of war matter of fact you could own cannons back then as a citizen so I don't see the logic in starting a campaign to limit military weapons.

Merry Christmas

Bill

Manolito
12-26-2012, 3:27 PM
Thanks Nate I typed 2013 while my mind saw 2014. I don't own any semi auto rifles other than 22. All are bolt or single shot picked up when things were a lot cheaper and things were traded at the local range. So now that I have corrected my error will I have to register them in 2014 under 809 or will only the new ones need to be registered? Any help would be appreciated.

Just a side note in 1966 -67-68 I was allowed to carry a M-16 or an M-14 I chose the m-14 I did not like the 5.56 then and so I never bought one in the civillian market having said that I believe it is the right of every citizen in good standings right to bear arms. There were many calibers and designs when the constitution was written and the amendments were accepted and they didn't say squirrel guns only no 50 caliber weapons of war matter of fact you could own cannons back then as a citizen so I don't see the logic in starting a campaign to limit military weapons.

Merry Christmas

Bill

Manolito
12-26-2012, 3:27 PM
Thanks Nate I typed 2013 while my mind saw 2014. I don't own any semi auto rifles other than 22. All are bolt or single shot picked up when things were a lot cheaper and things were traded at the local range. So now that I have corrected my error will I have to register them in 2014 under 809 or will only the new ones need to be registered? Any help would be appreciated.

Just a side note in 1966 -67-68 I was allowed to carry a M-16 or an M-14 I chose the m-14 I did not like the 5.56 then and so I never bought one in the civillian market having said that I believe it is the right of every citizen in good standings right to bear arms. There were many calibers and designs when the constitution was written and the amendments were accepted and they didn't say squirrel guns only no 50 caliber weapons of war matter of fact you could own cannons back then as a citizen so I don't see the logic in starting a campaign to limit military weapons.

Merry Christmas

Bill

Nate74
12-26-2012, 7:48 PM
Bill, first thank you for your service. You over lapped my dad by two years, though he was turning wrenches on F-4s. As I understand it, AB809 only deals with new purchases or transfers.

DJMajors
12-26-2012, 9:10 PM
Just out of curiosity if i gave up a few of my rifles to the buy back did they note that

Knomad
12-26-2012, 9:20 PM
With all the data mining going on and the feds essentially vacuuming our e-mails, you should assume that they know exactly what you have.

And if you choose to have a "boating accident" and then keep buying ammo for the firearm which was "lost" they are going to make it very difficult for you in court.

The obvious out is to buy a second and/or third firearm chambered for that round so that when one firearm is lost you still have a reason for purchasing the ammo.

I don't think any of us are ready to go quite that far. If you are, don't tell us.

Stop and think about it for a moment. Counting e-mails alone, there are billions of transactions per day in the U.S. Add in phone calls, texts, paper transactions, everything else, there's a whole lot of zeroes on the end of whatever that number is.

There are what, perhaps a few tens of thousands of folks at the various security agencies, most of them doing things other than data mining? Even with very fast computers doing random or auto checks, if they tried to look at even a few percent of the total transactions they'd quickly be buried under it. The city has trouble looking through two file cabinets and finding my building plans from a few years ago, imagine if they had to search 14 large warehouses full of archived hard drives? We complain about government inefficiency, and then we somehow think they're magically better at this?

So... the technical ability to monitor and collect information is very different from that information actually making it into a human consciousness or into a case file. Basically, you probably only need to worry if you've already done something else to attract someone's attention. It's all a question of priorities.

Ron-Solo
12-26-2012, 10:57 PM
If you have authorized a LEO to inspect your guns and note serial numbers, the big database may know.

um......NO.

Running a serial number is far different than data entry into the system. Data entry is restricted to certain individuals within a department, on specified terminals, and only certain functions. Some of these included evidence, lost, stolen, and voluntary surrender. When a firearm is destroyed by an agency, the agency updates it as stolen. Prior to 1992, an agency could process voluntary registration also, but that was taken over by the state.

Ron-Solo
12-26-2012, 11:06 PM
Like others have said. You must assume they know. I've personally seen computerized records of weapons I bought in the early 80's.

Since the DROS requirement began in the 1920's and the California Automated Firearms System went on line in the 1970's, why wouldn't a handgun bought from a dealer in the 1980's be in the system?

The 1992 time reference everyone keeps referring to is when private sales were required to use an FFL and DROS became computerized. Before that,the Dealers Report of Sale was completed by hand. A copy was kept by the dealer, a copy was mailed to the local police, and a copy was mailed to DOJ in Sacramento. If there was a denial, DOJ mailed the denial back to the dealer. That was the original reason there was a 15 day wait on handguns. My father was an FFL in the 70's and 80's and I helped him sell a lot of guns.