HawaiiTo Put Gun Owners in Federal Database

[Rucker61]

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/05/24/hawaii-could-be-first-to-put-gun-owners-in-federal-database/

"Hawaii could become the first state in the United States to enter gun owners into an FBI database that will automatically notify police if an island resident is arrested anywhere else in the country."

[hatidua]

isn't registration grand...

[Great-Kazoo]

isn't registration grand...

May I haff you papers Pleez.

BUT The government doesn't want to take your guns. ONLY COMMON SENSE GUN LAWS.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Not only are they entering them in a federal database, they're charging them $50 each to do so.

[milwaukeeshaker]

No such thing as gun registration, several posters, and one moderator have told me that many times. It's all a Conspiracy theory, and you can get banned for posting any of that.

[Skip]

But we can't check an ID to vote.

They must really afraid of people who are currently legal gun owners and become prohibited persons at some point in the future. Wonder why that is?

[Great-Kazoo]

No such thing as gun registration, several posters, and one moderator have told me that many times. It's all a Conspiracy theory, and you can get banned for posting any of that.

IN COLORADO !

[cstone]

No such thing as gun registration, several posters, and one moderator have told me that many times. It's all a Conspiracy theory, and you can get banned for posting any of that.

You can get banned for whining as well.

[milwaukeeshaker]

So, I cannot say anything that you don't like. That's censorship. How ironic, we cry and bray about violations of our 2nd amendment rights on this forum, but you can violate my 1st amendment rights at your whim, and silence my posts if they are not in line with what you deem correct. What is this forum, a place for discussion of differing views, or your personal kingdom where opinions not to your liking are squashed?

[hurley842002]

So, I cannot say anything that you don't like. That's censorship. How ironic, we cry and bray about violations of our 2nd amendment rights on this forum, but you can violate my 1st amendment rights at your whim, and silence my posts if they are not in line with what you deem correct. What is this forum, a place for discussion of differing views, or your personal kingdom where opinions not to your liking are squashed?

It's a private forum FFS! You are here by the grace of the forum owner (who is a lot nicer than I'd be).

[milwaukeeshaker]

If diverse opinions cannot be voiced on a forum FFS then what is the point?

[jmg8550]

You keep droning on about registration. There is no registration in Colorado. Not sure how many different times it needs to be drawn out in crayon for you. Maybe purple crayon this time will work.

This is a privately owned forum, you can leave anytime you like. Just as the Mods can ban you for pretty much any reason. Ain't freedom grand!?

[cstone]

Last warning. Keep it up and the next time will be longer.

[milwaukeeshaker]

Even though I do not believe I did anything to warrant the attention and threats you have given me, I still will not bow and kiss your ring. Do as you will to silence me, and exercise your dictatorship of this forum.

[cstone]

No threat.

[alan0269]

If diverse opinions cannot be voiced on a forum FFS then what is the point?

From what I've seen, most bans do not come from just what is said, but rather the manner (or lack of manners) in how it is said. While most people here have similar opinions on most subjects related to firearms and the ownership of them, there have been many topics that not everyone agrees on. The discussions have been allowed to continue as long as they are done in a respectful, adult way. The problems usually arise when someone can't handle the fact that somebody else has a different opinion and then takes the low road to insult and show a lack of respect about it. As others have said, this is a privately owned forum, and if the owner and moderators of the site deem that a topic will not be acceptable on the site it is their right to do so. As users of the site, we can choose to go elsewhere if we don't want to play within the rules. Unfortunately the mods have to give people a "time out" for being childish or not following the rules, which in some instance prompts those that don't play well with others to move on - usually they are not missed until a "where has XXXX gone?" discussion pops up. Yes, you have the right to say what you want, but they also have the right to moderate the site as they see fit.

Back on topic:

This is just the latest way that law abiding gun owners are being treated worse than the criminals they want to protect themselves from. Hawaii is not known for being high on the gun friendly states list, but I would have expected this to come from California or New York first. Perhaps this is the "test" for expanding into bigger areas.

[Irving]

I wonder how they go about placing the cost onto gun owners.

[TFOGGER]

I wonder how they go about placing the cost onto gun owners.

I would guess it would be through a fee system, perhaps at point of sale, or by requiring an annual license. All things which criminals will summarily ignore.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I wonder how they go about placing the cost onto gun owners.


I would guess it would be through a fee system, perhaps at point of sale, or by requiring an annual license. All things which criminals will summarily ignore.

As TFOGGER says, it's a fee system, charged when the gun is registered. Unlike Colorado, Hawai`i actually does register guns. You have to take your gun(s) to the designated county police station within 3 days of acquiring the gun or bringing it in-state and register it with the police. In Honolulu, you go to the main police station on Beretania Street.

Hawaii has controlled firearms ever since the American ambassador used US Marines to support American businessmen in overthrowing the queen. The Powers That Be didn't want the natives to have any distance weapons back then and they still don't want a population capable of resisting their edicts.

[roberth]

As TFOGGER says, it's a fee system, charged when the gun is registered. Unlike Colorado, Hawai`i actually does register guns. You have to take your gun(s) to the designated county police station within 3 days of acquiring the gun or bringing it in-state and register it with the police. In Honolulu, you go to the main police station on Beretania Street.

Hawaii has controlled firearms ever since the American ambassador used US Marines to support American businessmen in overthrowing the queen. The Powers That Be didn't want the natives to have any distance weapons back then and they still don't want a population capable of resisting their edicts.

I didn't know any of that, back in 1959, how could Hawai`i be accepted into the union with that kind of attitude towards the 2nd?

Maybe I'm incorrectly assuming that the US followed The Constitution even back then.

[hatidua]

A great many of us have voluntarily placed ourselves on "the list" already.

I think it's fair to say that anyone with a carry permit or NFA stamp is already firmly on "the list", and I suspect it goes a good bit wider than just those people.

[KS63]

I had to register a pistol that I brought home to Hawaii back in 2001 with HPD. Photo and fingerprints. It would be similar to being processed as a criminal. I smash my head against a wall if I have to talk politics with childhood friends who still live there. I would go as far to say that Hawaii is more progressive than CA, D.C or NY.

[Zundfolge]

So why isn't all this a violation of the 1986 Firearms Owners Protection Act? With this nonsense and California poised to require recording of ammo sales, seems like the only thing left of the FOPA is the stupid closure of the NFA registry to full auto guns.

[cstone]

Has any resident of Hawaii filed a law suit against the state to challenge the law? It doesn't seem likely that the residents will change the position of the government as they put the Democratic Party candidates into office and keep them there. High taxes, lots of government provided social welfare, and plenty of government oversight. This pretty much describes what I know of Hawaii for the non-tourists.

[hurley842002]

Has any resident of Hawaii filed a law suit against the state to challenge the law? It doesn't seem likely that the residents will change the position of the government as they put the Democratic Party candidates into office and keep them there. High taxes, lots of government provided social welfare, and plenty of government oversight. This pretty much describes what I know of Hawaii for the non-tourists.

Yup, I've never been to Hawaii, but have worked with and spoken with several folks that are either natives of HI, or have lived there for a period of time. The residents of HI want it this way, and have for quite some time.

[Dave]

Yup, I've never been to Hawaii, but have worked with and spoken with several folks that are either natives of HI, or have lived there for a period of time. The residents of HI want it this way, and have for quite some time.

Having been stationed there I can tell you I met a lot of natives that view it as restitution for white people taking their land and raping their women. Or raping the land and taking their women. One of those two.

[Great-Kazoo]

Having been stationed there I can tell you I met a lot of natives that view it as restitution for white people taking their land and raping their women. Or raping the land and taking their women. One of those two.

Slightly OT. For some reason they seem to overlook the Asian influence, or should i say buying up of island land for their own use. Over the "white theft".
But NOOoooo it's the Haole who continually screws them over..

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

You keep droning on about registration. There is no registration in Colorado. Not sure how many different times it needs to be drawn out in crayon for you. Maybe purple crayon this time will work.

This is a privately owned forum, you can leave anytime you like. Just as the Mods can ban you for pretty much any reason. Ain't freedom grand!?

I have to ask...can you prove there is not a current registration database being built in Colorado? I can prove that they ask for serial numbers and model description as well as perspective owners info, and make sure said future owner doesn't owe the state or any state backed institutions extortion money as well as verifying perspective buyer isn't "federally" prohibited. Everything is entered into a computer. Does that computer magically forget everything when they hit save? It must be grand to keep your head in the sand.

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

A great many of us have voluntarily placed ourselves on "the list" already.

I think it's fair to say that anyone with a carry permit or NFA stamp is already firmly on "the list", and I suspect it goes a good bit wider than just those people.

Yeah even if it's just a check mark next to our names in the computer i think every ffl type gets one.

[cstone]

I have to ask...can you prove there is not a current registration database being built in Colorado? I can prove that they ask for serial numbers and model description as well as perspective owners info, and make sure said future owner doesn't owe the state or any state backed institutions extortion money as well as verifying perspective buyer isn't "federally" prohibited. Everything is entered into a computer. Does that computer magically forget everything when they hit save? It must be grand to keep your head in the sand.

Who is "they" and when are you asked all of these questions? I fill out a 4473, and the FFL runs the information which generates a return that either permits the transfer or doesn't based on criminal history and public debt information that CBI has in the state's database. Does CBI know how many guns you've purchased? I would have to answer "yes" but CBI doesn't receive or retain any of the information on the 4473. If you have a criminal history or owe any government agency money, you can be absolutely certain that the state will get their money.

I have to ask, can you prove that there is a current registration database being built in Colorado?

I am uncertain as to how the OP's story about gun laws in Hawaii are related to the gun laws and background checks in Colorado.

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

Who is "they" and when are you asked all of these questions? I fill out a 4473, and the FFL runs the information which generates a return that either permits the transfer or doesn't based on criminal history and public debt information that CBI has in the state's database. Does CBI know how many guns you've purchased? I would have to answer "yes" but CBI doesn't receive or retain any of the information on the 4473. If you have a criminal history or owe any government agency money, you can be absolutely certain that the state will get their money.

I have to ask, can you prove that there is a current registration database being built in Colorado?

I am uncertain as to how the OP's story about gun laws in Hawaii are related to the gun laws and background checks in Colorado.

It wasn't directed at the op thread topic, sorry i was sidetracked by the other posters attack on our newly banned member. yes they collect all info, and rather then utilize the federal background check system which has served as the status quo for simple criminal background checks for years Colorado uses it's "better" system through state systems backed by federal nics database. Who monitors said state database and what is entered, saved, or deleted? And why was the original compromise of criminal records checks again compromised for credit checks to buy a gun? IDK....sorry, not trying to troll just had a few and get sick of the attacks on anyone who questions big brother (or would it be little brother in this case?). It is our job as responsible citizens to question our government.



(and we all know the mysterious they cannot be named LOL ;) )

[brutal]

It wasn't directed at the op thread topic, sorry i was sidetracked by the other posters attack on our newly banned member. yes they collect all info, and rather then utilize the federal background check system which has served as the status quo for simple criminal background checks for years Colorado uses it's "better" system through state systems backed by federal nics database. Who monitors said state database and what is entered, saved, or deleted? And why was the original compromise of criminal records checks again compromised for credit checks to buy a gun? IDK....sorry, not trying to troll just had a few and get sick of the attacks on anyone who questions big brother (or would it be little brother in this case?). It is our job as responsible citizens to question our government.



(and we all know the mysterious they cannot be named LOL ;) )

FFL's don't submit make/model/serial. They only submit the 4473 information YOU complete and "long gun" or "handgun."

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

FFL's don't submit make/model/serial. They only submit the 4473 information YOU complete and "long gun" or "handgun."

why is the serial asked for in pp? One can argue to check to see if it is stolen in their "database" but it is still recorded. As an ffl you must record the serial number and buyers info in you records, but private party sales for previously untraceable or lost trace firearms are "refreshed" in the trace database.

[Irving]

The serial number isn't sent in as part of the information for the background check from what I understand. The FFL must record the serial number for their own data base, as does any business, and that information isn't turned into the government until the FFL goes out of business.

[cstone]

Seven databases checked by CBI's InstaCheck

1.DMV- (Utilized to validate the information provided by the FFL)*
●
2.CCIC- (Colorado Crime Information Center)*
●
3.NCIC- (National Crime Information Center)
●
4.III- (Interstate Identification Index)
●
5.NICS Index- (Prohibited Persons)
●
6.ICE- (Immigrations and Customs Enforcement)
●
7.PAS- (Colorado State Courts Data Access)*
*Databases not searched by FBI NICS

I don't believe everything the state or federal government publishes. I don't support background checks for private purchases. I do believe that the CBI system is better for the residents of Colorado than FBI's NICS. If you think getting an answer from CBI is difficult, contact the nice people at the FBI about your background check results and see how responsive they are.

https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cbi/firearms-instacheck-unit (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/.../InstaCheck%20Powerpoint.pptx‎)

An interesting starting point for research into the complex process of gun tracing. It is not like what is depicted on television or in the movies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Tracing_Center

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

Seven databases checked by CBI's InstaCheck

1.DMV- (Utilized to validate the information provided by the FFL)*
●
2.CCIC- (Colorado Crime Information Center)*
●
3.NCIC- (National Crime Information Center)
●
4.III- (Interstate Identification Index)
●
5.NICS Index- (Prohibited Persons)
●
6.ICE- (Immigrations and Customs Enforcement)
●
7.PAS- (Colorado State Courts Data Access)*
*Databases not searched by FBI NICS

I don't believe everything the state or federal government publishes. I don't support background checks for private purchases. I do believe that the CBI system is better for the residents of Colorado than FBI's NICS. If you think getting an answer from CBI is difficult, contact the nice people at the FBI about your background check results and see how responsive they are.

https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/.../InstaCheck%20Powerpoint.pptx‎

Well consider this one more educated.

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

An interesting starting point for research into the complex process of gun tracing. It is not like what is depicted on television or in the movies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Tracing_Center


I didn't even click the link....traces start at the importer or manufacturer. serial number hits it goes to sales record keeping and follows the trail down the paper in most cases. There isn't a legally valid computer database per se but you are required to keep paper records as an ffl (cough). And most firearms records are lost after the first consumer purchase. bring the serial number back via computer check and then a trace to new ffl you have a new tag to legally follow. I am way to paranoid and even a little intelligent....I could probably devise an even better way to circumvent the current regulation keeping the powers that be from making a bona fide registration if given the motivation but they already have a decent start.

(edit...I did warn you that I have been drinking lol)

[GunsRBadMMMMKay]

Since I may or may not have aided in de-railing this thread....let me help get it back on track by saying

"Fuck Hawaii"

LOL

[Great-Kazoo]

Since I may or may not have aided in de-railing this thread....let me help get it back on track by saying

"Fuck Hawaii"

LOL

In other words........................... ALOHA

[Jefe's AR]

Having been stationed there I can tell you I met a lot of natives that view it as restitution for white people taking their land and raping their women. Or raping the land and taking their women. One of those two.

Odd since they overwhelmingly voted to become a State.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii_Admission_Act


Statehood vote[edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hawaii_Admission_Act&action=edit&section=2)]

Out of a total population of 600,000 in the islands and 155,000 registered voters, 140,000 votes were cast, the highest turnout ever in Hawaii. The vote showed approval rates of at least 93% by voters on all major islands (see adjacent figure for details). Of the approximately 140,000 votes cast, fewer than 8000 rejected the Admission Act of 1959.















Slightly OT. For some reason they seem to overlook the Asian influence, or should i say buying up of island land for their own use. Over the "white theft".
But NOOoooo it's the Haole who continually screws them over..

There's some truth to this.


Opposition to statehood[edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hawaii_Admission_Act&action=edit&section=3)]

The acceptance of statehood for Hawaii was not without its share of controversy. Many Native Hawaiians in Hawaii protested against statehood. Also, various bills of admission were stalled in congressional hearings since the early 1900s because of the racial prejudices of many members of the United States House of Representatives (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives) and United States Senate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate). There was a fear of establishing a state that was governed by an ethnic minority, namely the large Asian American (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_American) population. Lawmakers questioned the American patriotism of Hawaii residents. Upon the election of John A. Burns (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_A._Burns) from the Hawaii Democratic Party (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii_Democratic_Party) as delegate of the Territory of Hawaii to Congress, southern leaders charged that Burns' election was evidence of Hawaii as a haven for communism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism). John A. Burns (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_A._Burns), in 1959, would reflect on the obstacles against the statehood campaign and place more emphasis on the resistance to statehood in the islands, rather than in Washington itself.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Has any resident of Hawaii filed a law suit against the state to challenge the law? It doesn't seem likely that the residents will change the position of the government as they put the Democratic Party candidates into office and keep them there. High taxes, lots of government provided social welfare, and plenty of government oversight. This pretty much describes what I know of Hawaii for the non-tourists.

Short answer is, yes, the Hawaii Rifle Association has filed suits but they never get anywhere. Ever since the Democrats took over the state government in the late 1950s, they have brainwashed the populace. Let's face it, Hawaii's public education system isn't very good although the plethora of Asians who emphasized education culturally masked over the many problems in the schools themselves. To be fair, HPS is better than than many in the country but it is definitely in the bottom rungs, particularly if you exclude those who are high achievers because of family or personal initiative (as opposed to anything the schools have done for them).

It's possible this is a left over from the plantation mentality -- public schools were for the plantation workers and other menial labor while children of the privileged attended private schools like Punahou or Iolani. Many of Hawaii's prominent politicians like former governors Frank Fasi, John Waihee, and Neil Abercrombie depended on a largely ignorant populace and the stranglehold of the Democratic Party.

Add the Democratic Party's dominance to the anti-firearm stance in many (if not most) Asian cultures (again, mostly tracing back to The Powers That Be not wanting the peasantry to have the ability to defend itself) and the focus of most locals on just enjoying the good life of sun, sand, and surf and you get an environment where most of the populace doesn't notice or care about gun registration or restrictions. Very few anymore actually own guns so they don't notice the restrictions. I think potheads outnumber gun owners in Hawaii by a good 2 or 3 to 1 margin (if not higher) so guess where any "freedom" focus will be?

Many locals don't care about anything as long as they keep getting their government checks (or EBT cards now, I guess). Things are coming to a head with all the homeless living on the beaches but the government is trying to handle that by shifting them to places out of sight and humanely relaxing building codes to let them build traditional hales (grass shacks). It will work as long as they can depend on other peoples' money to keep the economy propped up.

As far as how Hawaii was accepted into the Union, it has always been valued for its strategic location. Queen Liliuokalani took no armed action (and even countenanced the Hawaiians against such action) to reclaim her kingdom because she thought the US would see the inequity of the US Ambassador's actions and pull their troops, restoring the monarchy. She had good reason to think this as the US President (I think Grover Cleveland) had done exactly that the first time Americans tried to overthrow the monarchy. What she didn't understand was domestic politics in the US prevented the President from doing that again and the sugar growers and missionaries were spinning the overthrow as a triumph for democracy and American manifest destiny.

I have no truck with the sovreignty movement as it's mostly a cover (IMO) for people just trying to gain power for themselves and it ignores the fact that Hawaii was never going to be able to maintain its sovreignty into the 20th century. There were too many world powers that coveted the strategic location: Germany, Russia, France, England, Japan, etc. America had the good fortune (and bad faith) to move first and I think that has worked out positively in the long run for Hawaii, America, and the world.

This has been your annual teaching moment in the history and culture of a beautiful place and friendly (if frequently idiotic) people.

[hurley842002]

Thanks for the lesson Aloha!

[roberth]

Thank you Aloha.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I realized in my haste to answer cstone's question, I never got further.


Yup, I've never been to Hawaii, but have worked with and spoken with several folks that are either natives of HI, or have lived there for a period of time. The residents of HI want it this way, and have for quite some time.

SOME residents of Hawaii want it that way, some just ignore the laws the same way they ignore marijuana or alcohol or gambling or fireworks laws, some fight it, and most are just ignorant or don't care.


Having been stationed there I can tell you I met a lot of natives that view it as restitution for white people taking their land and raping their women. Or raping the land and taking their women. One of those two.


Slightly OT. For some reason they seem to overlook the Asian influence, or should i say buying up of island land for their own use. Over the "white theft".
But NOOoooo it's the Haole who continually screws them over..

Big difference between the "natives" and the rest of the population. There's been a sovereignty movement since about the late 60s/early 70s among the "natives". It was small and laughed at through the 80s and is now small but not laughed at. Realize that only about 20% of the population has even a drop of Hawaiian blood and many experts don't believe there are any "pure-blooded" Hawaiians left. The Hawaiians weren't anal about blood-heritage. In any event, that leaves you with a small minority of the populace that have pent-up feelings about "American aggression". OTOH, you're really not going to care about what small percentage of the population it is if you're the white dude out in Makaha with no local friends when a bunch of drunk kanakas decide to get some revenge. It doesn't happen much these days but again, you're not going to care how rare it is if you're on the receiving end ...

Now, why do these locals have this dislike of the haole but not the Asians? First off, the Japanese and Chinese who've been buying up property since the 80s do just that -- they buy the properties. The haoles that overthrew Queeen Liliuokalani appropriated all royal lands for the new Republic of Hawaii which became State lands when it transitioned to a Territory and then to a State. Not surprisingly, the locals view that as theft and are a bit more upset about that than the other foreigners buying property. In addition, they've had well over a century to get pissed off about the overthrow whereas the land purchases have been relatively recent and masked by other real estate issues. The general non-Hawaiian populace is more upset about the Japanese and Chinese buying sprees because of the way they raised real estate prices (and therefore taxes) but it's not as intense as the Hawaiians who feel Hawaii should be an independent nation governed by the Hawaiians.


Odd since they overwhelmingly voted to become a State.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii_Admission_Act





There's some truth to this.

Several factors here on Statehood. First, as I said before, only a minority of people in Hawaii then as now were actually Hawaiian so only a small percentage would have had ill feelings about Statehood in 1959. In fact, Hawaii had already been a Territory for some time so the people had time to get used to being a part of the US already which just made them more enthusiastic about getting the benefits of full statehood. My father had no problem getting a commission as an officer in the new US Air Force while it was the Territory of Hawaii and my grandfather served in the National Guard during or just after World War I.

Second, nearly everyone who voted on statehood could remember Hawaii during World War II. They had been bombed by the Japanese and remembered it was American dollars that grew Honolulu from a small town into a real city. During the American "occupation", they went from horses and buggies to automobiles and airplanes. The economy expanded (previously it was just sugar growing and cattle), tourism became an actual industry. Yes, Iolani Palace had electricity during King Kalakaua's reign but it was still relatively rare before the Americans took over. The Japanese locals of course took statehood as a validation that reversed much of the attitude they experienced during World War II. All of these complex reasons and more made the prospect of statehood overwhelmingly appealing to the vast majority of the population.

EDIT: While it's popular on the mainland to make fun of the Hawaiians' love of spam, realize it was the only meat many of them could get during WW II. Most of the fresh meat went to feed the troops but the general populace never saw it so it's not like they'd have seen it as being taken from them. I could be wrong but the general feeling I've gotten from that generation was that they looked at it as a matter of getting any kind of meat thanks to the Americans and spam so it was yet another reason to like America.

Of course, I'm simplifying a lot in these short explanations but Hawaiians -- native or otherwise -- are every bit as varied and complex as Coloradans and the Second Amendment touches very few of them.

[68Guy]

A great many of us have voluntarily placed ourselves on "the list" already.

I think it's fair to say that anyone with a carry permit or NFA stamp is already firmly on "the list", and I suspect it goes a good bit wider than just those people.

I agree somewhat except, just because we have a carry permit in CO, only tells the gobmint that I (most likely) HAVE a handgun but without an actual registry, they know not WHAT handgun, how many and if I have any rifles - BIG difference. Now as you say on the second part, totally agree that by accepting to build an SBR and get a legal tax stamp (see that is how us law abiding gun owners roll right?), they DO know exactly what type of rifle I have and the serial number.... for that one [AR15] I still ask ANY congressman or Liberal for that matter to please give me ONE example of how knowing the make/model/serial number of a firearm has EVER STOPPED a crime. Just used to pick up the pieces afterwards if the perp is stupid enough to leave the weapon behind at the crime scene or is killed.

[68Guy]

why is the serial asked for in pp? One can argue to check to see if it is stolen in their "database" but it is still recorded. As an ffl you must record the serial number and buyers info in you records, but private party sales for previously untraceable or lost trace firearms are "refreshed" in the trace database.

No conspiracy theory... when you go to purchase a firearm (any state), you fill out the 4473 which is sent off to the NCIS and CBI (in this state). It is doing a BG check on you and looking for felonies and warrants. The make/model/serial is NOT brought across and is kept as part of the hard copy that the FFL must keep FOREVER after the sale completes. If there is ever a crime committed, the FBI/ATF or whatever favorite 3 letter agency can query if the member got a BC check and where and then they have to go to that FFL and pull the records with a warrant. And by the way, it is the requirement to keep and protect the 4473's FOREVER reason that many FFLs do NOT want to process F2F private transfers here in CO. Basically for a measly sum of what $20-45 they are taking on the responsibility of storing your paperwork forever and just waiting to be contacted by the ATF.

[Honey Badger282.8]

I thought the requirement on 4473s was 20 years.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I thought the requirement on 4473s was 20 years.

I'm neither a lawyer nor an FFL and I don't work with or for the BATFE but the citations below (red emphasis added) would seem to agree with you. However, keeping records for 20 years might as well be forever and if the inspecting agents are going to give extra proctology exams to licensees that scrupulously destroy records at the 20 year point, I can understand why a licensee might hold onto their records for longer. I don't blame anyone who doesn't want to keep and maintain paperwork for 20 years for a lousy $5-10.


How long are licensees required to maintain ATF Forms 4473? (https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/atf-form-4473)
Licensees shall retain each ATF Form 4473 for a period of not less than 20 years after the date of sale or disposition. Where a licensee has initiated a National Instant Background Check System (NICS) check for a proposed firearms transaction, but the sale, delivery, or transfer of the firearm is not made, the licensee shall record any transaction number on the Form 4473, and retain the Form 4473 for a period of not less than 5 years after the date of the NICS inquiry.

[18 U.S.C. 923(g)(1)(A); 27 CFR 478.129(b)]








§478.102 Sales or deliveries of firearms on and after November 30, 1998.
(a) Background check. Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer (the licensee) shall not sell, deliver, or transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this part unless the licensee meets the following requirements:
... {snip} ...
(b) Transaction number. In any transaction for which a licensee receives a transaction number from NICS (which shall include either a NICS transaction number or, in States where the State is recognized as a point of contact for NICS checks, a State transaction number), such number shall be recorded on a firearms transaction record, Form 4473, which shall be retained in the records of the licensee in accordance with the provisions of §478.129. This applies regardless of whether the transaction is approved or denied by NICS, and regardless of whether the firearm is actually transferred.



§478.125 Record of receipt and disposition. (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=70394195a3edf623eba7ce77a1bddff1&node=27:3.0.1.2.3&rgn=div5#se27.3.478_1101)
... {snip} ...
(e) Firearms receipt and disposition by dealers. Each licensed dealer shall enter into a record each receipt and disposition of firearms. In addition, before commencing or continuing a firearms business, each licensed dealer shall inventory the firearms possessed for such business and shall record same in the record required by this paragraph. The record required by this paragraph shall be maintained in bound form under the format prescribed below. The purchase or other acquisition of a firearm shall, except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, be recorded not later than the close of the next business day following the date of such purchase or acquisition. The record shall show the date of receipt, the name and address or the name and license number of the person from whom received, the name of the manufacturer and importer (if any), the model, serial number, type, and the caliber or gauge of the firearm. The sale or other disposition of a firearm shall be recorded by the licensed dealer not later than 7 days following the date of such transaction. When such disposition is made to a nonlicensee, the firearms transaction record, Form 4473, obtained by the licensed dealer shall be retained, until the transaction is recorded, separate from the licensee's Form 4473 file and be readily available for inspection. When such disposition is made to a licensee, the commercial record of the transaction shall be retained, until the transaction is recorded, separate from other commercial documents maintained by the licensed dealer, and be readily available for inspection. The record shall show the date of the sale or other disposition of each firearm, the name and address of the person to whom the firearm is transferred, or the name and license number of the person to whom transferred if such person is a licensee, or the firearms transaction record, Form 4473, serial number if the licensed dealer transferring the firearm serially numbers the Forms 4473 and files them numerically. The format required for the record of receipt and disposition of firearms is as follows:

Firearms Acquisition and Disposition Record




Description of firearm
Receipt
Disposition


Manufacturer and importer (if any)
Model
Serial No.
Type
Caliber or gauge
Date
Name and address or name and license No.
Date
Name
Address or license No. if licensee, or Form 4473 Serial No. if Forms 4473 filed numerically











§478.127 Discontinuance of business.
Where a licensed business is discontinued and succeeded by a new licensee, the records prescribed by this subpart shall appropriately reflect such facts and shall be delivered to the successor. Where discontinuance of the business is absolute, the records shall be delivered within 30 days following the business discontinuance to the ATF Out-of-Business Records Center, 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, West Virginia 25405, or to any ATF office in the division in which the business was located: Provided, however, Where State law or local ordinance requires the delivery of records to other responsible authority, the Chief, Federal Firearms Licensing Center may arrange for the delivery of the records required by this subpart to such authority: Provided further, That where a licensed business is discontinued and succeeded by a new licensee, the records may be delivered within 30 days following the business discontinuance to the ATF Out-of-Business Records Center or to any ATF office in the division in which the business was located.

[T.D. ATF-290, 54 FR 53055, Dec. 27, 1989, as amended by T.D. ATF-363, 60 FR 17455, Apr. 6, 1995; T.D. ATF-11F, 73 FR 57242, Oct. 2, 2008


§478.129 Record retention.
(a) Records prior to Act. Licensed importers and licensed manufacturers may dispose of records of sale or other disposition of firearms prior to December 16, 1968. Licensed dealers and licensed collectors may dispose of all records of firearms transactions that occurred prior to December 16, 1968.
(b) Firearms transaction record. Licensees shall retain each Form 4473 and Form 4473(LV) for a period of not less than 20 years after the date of sale or disposition. Where a licensee has initiated a NICS check for a proposed firearms transaction, but the sale, delivery, or transfer of the firearm is not made, the licensee shall record any transaction number on the Form 4473, and retain the Form 4473 for a period of not less than 5 years after the date of the NICS inquiry. Forms 4473 shall be retained in the licensee's records as provided in §478.124(b): Provided, That Forms 4473 with respect to which a sale, delivery or transfer did not take place shall be separately retained in alphabetical (by name of transferee) or chronological (by date of transferee's certification) order.

... {snip} ...
(e) Records of dealers and collectors under the Act. The records prepared by licensed dealers and licensed collectors under the Act of the sale or other disposition of firearms and the corresponding record of receipt of such firearms shall be retained through December 15, 1988, after which records of transactions over 20 years of age may be discarded.

[hatidua]

Short answer is, yes, the Hawaii Rifle Association has filed suits but they never get anywhere. Ever since the Democrats took over the state government in the late 1950s, they have brainwashed the populace.

Sounds like Calguns....with more palm trees.

[68Guy]

I thought the requirement on 4473s was 20 years.
Yes you are correct. I did take a bit of a "creative Liberty" in using the word forever because legally it is a (minimum) of 20 years but in business terms, 20 years is kind of a lifetime... I apologize for my indisgression [Coffee]