I agree but by and large, I doubt your average terrorist runs down to the local gun shop and plops down his DL to get his weaponry.
I'm glad that at least so far it appears that Ashcroft is sticking to his support of the right to bear arms, but if the gun industry is to be saved then more is needed than maintaining the status quo. The status quo is so burdensome that some ludicrous percentage of FFL-holders have turned in their licenses since '92. (Did I hear 75% somewhere a few months ago?) While the propaganda war was/is being constantly waged on the visible stage, the real strategy has been going on behind the scenes. That strategy is to eliminate the dealer base. Get rid of those pesky dealers and the manufacturers are absolutely sure to follow, as many already have. The firearms industry in the USA is in a death spiral, my friends.
MM
Today the terrorist is mideastern/Islamist extremist. Tommorow it may be someone who thinks the government has exceded it's proper constitutional limits and wants change. It will include "gun nuts".
....
But who defines a terrorist, if its a violent criminal then I could agree, but some of the antigun-nuts might describe it as someone displaying a gun to defend their home.
I agree with the others above who believe the information is not being deleted. IANAL, but from a legal perspective, I believe it doesn't matter if the NICS data is kept for one minute or one hundred millennia since the very requirement that the information be collected from a firearms buyer is in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.
One of the predicating notions that this country was founded upon is that private information and property not fall into the government's hands without probable cause or a warrant. Simply desiring to procure a firearm does not give the government cause to demand private information if due to nothing else than the existence of the Second Amendment. Simply fearing that a firearm will be used in a crime is no excuse either, since prior restraint is an illegitimate legal tool on its face.
Furthermore, even if the government DID have cause to demand private information, the accused is under no obligation to aide in its production. If the government has a case, let it be made, but THEY are the ones that must do the foot work, not the person under threat of fine or imprisonment.
The terrorists didn't use guns. The used box cutters and jet airplanes.