Does The ATF Have a List of Guns that You Own?

Federal law and ATF regulations require a licensed firearms dealer (an FFL holder) to record the date a firearm was received, the date of receipt, and the name and address or the name and license number (FFL number) of the person (or corporation) from whom the firearm was received. The dealer must also record the name of the manufacturer and importer (if any) and the model, serial number, type and caliber or gauge.

Then, when a firearm is disposed of, for any reason, a dealer is required to record the disposition: showing the date of sale or other disposition– gift, loan or testing (anytime a gun leaves the licensed premises it must be logged out of the bound book) and the name and address or the name and license number (FFL number if a dealer) of the person (or corporation) to whom the firearm was transferred. If to a non-FFL holder, there will also be a completed form 4473 in the dealer’s records and the information will include the person’s full legal name and address, NICS approval code and make, model and caliber.

These requirements have been in place since at least 1968 and dealers must make their records available for ATF inspection during business hours — and no warrant is required. The law prohibits ATF from making complete copies of dealer’s records which could be used to create a registry of guns and gun owners.

Now that I’ve explained the law, I want to explain how computer technology is causing a problem for gun buyers.

While attending the SHOT Show, I learned about a software package that makes dealer record keeping easier.

The software allows dealers to keep an electronic bound book. It is an online package and the dealer pays a monthly fee based upon the number of transactions. When the software is being used, the screen resembles a bound book. The software has spell check and prevents misspelling of names such as Glock (Gloc) or SCCY (SKKY). And because all of the information is typed on a screen, it makes it easy for those who have poor quality handwriting to keep legible records that can then be made into a PDF which, when printed, looks like a traditional printed “bound book.”

When speaking with the software vendors, I specifically asked how does ATF conduct compliance inspections of dealers who are using this software package. I was given a demonstration and shown how the software exports the data (guns and gun buyers names and addresses) into either a PDF that resembles an old-fashioned bound book or a Comma Separated Values (CSV) file that can be opened in Microsoft Excel.

I was told that this “feature” makes a compliance check easy because the dealer simply exports the CSV file to a thumb drive and the ATF leaves with the data. I was told that ATF analyzes the data away from the FFL’s premises. If there are any discrepancies or problems the gun dealer is notified and usually given an opportunity to correct the errors.

When dealing with compliance with government rules, many people do what is easy. That’s why so many file their US form 1040 tax return electronically, even though experts claim that increases the likelihood of an audit. I wasn’t surprised when the software vendor told me how well-received their application has been. Especially since it makes things easy, and ATF is not on dealer’s premises for more than a few minutes.

I accept that it is bad for business to have ATF personnel hanging around. This scheme is a danger, and allows ATF to easily create a gun registry — in violation of 18 USC 926 (a)(3). We have no way to know if a registry is actually being created and if the ATF is or is not destroying these records at the conclusion of the compliance check. One might argue they’re not, because GOA has received reports of ATF demanding copies of entire (paper) bound books. That is bad, but at least with paper, the data still needs to be converted to an electronic format to be of any real use. However, a CSV file that can be searched in MS Excel is of significant value to a government that wishes to track gun owners.

How do you feel about your personal information — linked to guns you own, by make, model and serial number — being put into the ATF’s hands? If you’re like me, you don’t like it, and you know that registration can and has led to confiscation. Not only in far away foreign lands but in US states like New York.

Ask. That’s right, ask your dealer how he keeps his or her records. Are they compiled in an old-fashioned bound book, or are they using one of these twenty-first century software packages?

GOA’s advice is to find a small, preferably home-based FFL — one who still keeps paper records — and transact exclusively with that FFL dealer. Take affirmative steps to protect yourself.

The FFL dealer is required to record all information from the Form 4473 into a "bound-book", called an "Acquisition and Disposition Log”.[6] The dealer must keep the Form 4473 on file for at least 20 years, and is required to surrender the log book to the ATF upon retirement from the firearms business.

Disposition includes submission of those records to the ATF National Tracing Center (ATF-NTC). Submission of these records will allow ATF to more effectively trace crime guns. The NTC requests that FFL licensees enclose a copy of the Active FFL and appropriately indicate that the records are over 20 years old. Records are to be sent to ATF, Out of Business Records Center, (OOBRC), 244 Needy Road, Martinsburg, WV 25405.

Before 1991, ATF kept the Out-of-Business records in paper hard copy filed at the Out-of-Business Records Center. In 1991, they began a major project to microfilm the paper records and destroy the hard copy. This project not only included the licensee's "Bound Book" (Acquisition/Disposition records), but also every ATF Form 4473, which contains name, address, height, weight, race, date of birth, place of birth, and driver's license number (or other ID). (GAO Report T-GGD-96-104, 04/25/96)

In 1992, ATF began creating a computerized "index" (based on firearm serial number and dealer license number) to the microfilmed Out-of-Business records. Data was originally captured on minicomputers and transferred to a mainframe computer database. The retrieval system, called "CARS" (Computer Assisted Retrieval System), was disclosed in a 1995 letter to Tanya K. Metaksa of the NRA. By 2000, ATF revealed they had indexed 100 million such records, with over 300 million additional records scheduled to be added over the following two years. (Commerce in Firearms, ATF, 2000) Over 400 million firearm transaction records were to be indexed by 2002 – about twice the total estimated number of firearms in the United States at that time.

According to gun rights advocates, which have long opposed any centralized, searchable registry of firearms sales, and notwithstanding the conclusions of the Government Accounting Office in 1996 that this system complied with legislative restrictions, this combination of automated and manual retrieval of individual sales records is a de facto system of registration of firearms, firearm owners and firearm transaction specifically prohibited by 18 U.S.C. 926(a), i.e., the FOPA of 1986.

By March, 2004, ATF acknowledged the existence of their advanced automated Microfilm Retrieval System (MRS) containing information on 380 million firearms with an additional 1 million firearms added per month. This system had been enlarged from the previous system (CARS) to contain not only firearm serial numbers, but the manufacturer and importer as well. Additional data fields have been added to help identify specific firearms. (April Pattavina, 2005)

More recently (since at least 2005), ATF has been converting microfilmed dealer out-of-business records to "digital images". It is not clear whether this is a digitized "picture" file of the microfilm, or a digital record of each individual acquisition/disposition. However, guns rights advocates take the position that, regardless of the storage method, and whether access to the detail A/D record is automated or manual, this system is a system of registration of firearms, firearm owners and firearm transactions prohibited by 18 U.S.C. 926(a).

In a paper presented to the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research in Geneva, Switzerland, published in 2003, Gary L. Thomas, Chief, Firearms Programs Division, ATF, discussed the planned digitization of Out-of-Business dealer, importer, and manufacturer records, mentioned the projected cost, and noted it would not require any legislative or regulatory changes. Shortly thereafter, the digitization project appeared in the Congressional Appropriations Bill.

From the 2005 Appropriations Bill:

Conversion of Records. The conferees recognize the need for ATF to complete the conversion of tens of thousands of existing Federal firearms dealer out-of-business records from film to digital images at the ATF National Tracing Center. Once the out-of-business records are fully converted, search time for these records will be reduced significantly. The conference agreement includes $4,200,000 for the ATF to hire additional contract personnel to continue the conversion and integration of records.

However, according to guns rights advocates, Appropriations Bills since 1979 have prohibited centralizing these same records:

Provided, That no funds appropriated herein shall be available for salaries or administrative expenses in connection with consolidating or centralizing, within the Department of Justice, the records, or any portion thereof, of acquisition and disposition of firearms maintained by Federal firearms licensees:

In the 2008 Appropriations Bill, the Tiahrt Amendment further restricted the disclosure of data from the Firearms Tracing System.

The Tiahrt Amendment is a provision of the U.S. Department of Justice appropriations bill that prohibits the National Tracing Center of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) from releasing information from its firearms trace database to anyone other than a law enforcement agency or prosecutor in connection with a criminal investigation.[1] This precludes gun trace data from being used in academic research of gun use in crime.[1] Additionally, the law blocks any data legally released from being admissible in civil lawsuits against gun sellers or manufacturers.[1]

The Tiahrt Amendment was first added by Todd Tiahrt (after whom it is named) to the 2003 federal appropriations bill. It was signed into the law as part of this bill on February 20, 2003. It was subsequently broadened in October 2003 with the addition of two provisions banning the ATF from requiring gun dealers to inspect their firearm inventories and requiring the FBI to destroy background check data within 24 hours. In 2004, it was altered again, this time to limit access to gun trace data by government officials, and to ban the use of such data in firearms license revocations or civil lawsuits.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.