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.
I'd read elsewhere that there was a 4473 for the snipers' purchase of their Bushmaster, so this type of paperwork problem seems likely.
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.