Posted on 11/12/2002 7:32:23 AM PST by Dallas
WASHINGTON --
The Supreme Court plunged into the gun debate Tuesday, agreeing to decide whether the government can keep secret information on some gun purchases and crimes, including details of database checks like those used to track weapons in the sniper case.
The Bush administration, backed by the National Rifle Association and a police group, claims that confidential records are needed to safeguard investigations and protect people's privacy.
Critics say the administration's policy keeps the public in the dark about gun violence and how well crime-fighters are doing.
At issue for the Supreme Court is the scope of a federal public information law, which allows reporters and other outsiders to get unclassified government records that officials would not otherwise release.
The court will decide if the release of the data could interfere with law enforcement efforts, which would exempt it from the sunshine law.
On the line is access to information on about 200,000 firearm traces a year, when officers confiscate a weapon in a crime then track down who made it, sold it and bought it.
The government releases some information now -- after a time lapse -- but erases the names of the gun maker, the seller, the buyer, and where the gun was used in crime, the Supreme Court was told.
The information is kept by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
Gun control advocates have criticized the ATF's regulation of the more than 100,000 licensed firearms dealers.
In the recent sniper case, the ATF is trying to find out how a rifle police believe was used in the sniper attacks vanished from a Washington state gun shop without a paper trail. Some senators have demanded more information about past investigations of the dealer.
The city of Chicago, which is suing the gun industry, filed suit to obtain the information under the Freedom of Information Act. Chicago is trying to recover money for gun violence. It claims marketing practices led to lawbreaking.
President Bush has opposed city lawsuits against the gun industry.
Also involved in the court's considerations will be information about people who bought multiple weapons, which is kept in another ATF database. The government refuses to reveal names from that database as well.
"There is simply no reasonable expectation of privacy involved in the purchase of firearms. And the recovery of a firearm by the authorities in the course of a criminal investigation is even less private," the Supreme Court was told by Lawrence Rosenthal, Chicago's attorney.
Solicitor General Theodore Olson, in his filings, said the ATF has reasonable policies designed to balance privacy with security. He said the appeals court decision "would significantly intrude upon the privacy of hundreds of thousands of individuals -- including firearms purchasers, potential witnesses to crime, and others -- without meaningfully assisting the public to evaluate the conduct of the federal government."
ATF has varying rules for releasing information. Some is released after one year, some after two and some after five years. And some details, like names, are never made available.
Rosenthal said the information would let the public evaluate the performances of law agencies. He said information in sensitive cases is coded and would not be made public.
Larry H. James, representing the 300,000-member Fraternal Order of Police, said: "This case not just about the release of data information, it is about the actual lives" of officers.
"Significant interference with their work, and a threat to their very lives, is squarely presented in this case," he wrote in urging the court to review the case.
The case is United States Department of the Treasury v. City of Chicago, 02-322.
They can't BY LAW, reveal those names. However, they can release the names of those who were DENIED the right to purchase. What most people don't know is that there are 2 lists. Those that have purchased(again, the law says the names can't be revealed) and those that were denied. But, when did a pesky law get in the liberals way?
How about theft? Is it me, or is it just plain stupidity that prevents the anti-gun types from seeing this?
"There is simply no reasonable expectation of privacy involved in the purchase of firearms. And the recovery of a firearm by the authorities in the course of a criminal investigation is even less private," the Supreme Court was told by Lawrence Rosenthal, Chicago's attorney.
OK, I'll bite. Step one after that is to register all purchases of books (and don't forget books borrowed from the libraries) and magazines, so as to allow the FBI and other LE organizations to more efficiently develop criminal profiles. After all, there is simply no reasonable expectation of privacy involved in the purchase or use of books and magazines. And the Internet - we either need Super Carnivore or an outrigh ban. The next step on this slippery slope is to mandate the fingerprinting and DNA sampling of every person in the country. After all, there is simply no reasonable expectation of privacy involved in these important crime-fighting tools. Oh, and the last step is mind-reading implants, when the technology is feasible. After all, if you have criminal intent, you have no expectation of privacy, and if you're a mind-numbed robot, you won't care anyway. (/sarcasm).
I can't wait for the Supremes to slap Chicago around a bit. They and the rest of the gun-grabbers need it (and a whole bunch more).
Word is that dealer is missing an awful lot of guns, enough that if it were theft he WOULD have noticed them missing and reported it. That many don't disappear off the books without the store owner knowing.
Oh no. First, we register all Moslims. The next step will be to license newspapers just the way television stations are already regulated.
If they don't like it, limit their capacity to ten pages as *assault newspapers.*
After all, they charge for subscriptions and advertising, so they're not part of the *free* press.
Then, after that's done, we can proceed as you suggest.
-archy-/-
But, but, you mean we have a National Firearm Registry? I thought they weren't supposed to have one, but hey, what do I know....
I'm sure that they can't wait to tie that information in with everything else they plan to collect into the TIA database.
Pentagon Plans a Computer System That Would Peek at Personal Data of Americans
I thought the guns were missing but the boxes were still there, stacked neatly with the barcode labels facing outward, ready for inventory.
Yep, they're keeping databases of our lives yet protecting our privacy at the same time. Orwell lives.
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.