But that is not the main issue. The point is that there is a database of gun owners in MD they check the people with protective orders against.
O'MALLEY: WE MAP THE LOCATION OF GUN OWNERS AND CCW HOLDERS HOMES!
- Thread starter marte616
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
But that is not the main issue. The point is that there is a database of gun owners in MD they check the people with protective orders against.
I understand what you are saying and the transcript backs up your assertion. But a person that was present at the conference heard differently-a side comment specifically about CCW holders's locations. I do not expect the Governor's office to print/post those comments in the transcripts online due to their potential for controversy.
BTW, nice FBM device, DRM Sparks!!! I was in the James Madison, Blue Crew!
BTW, nice FBM device, DRM Sparks!!! I was in the James Madison, Blue Crew!
SigMatt
Ultimate Member
Also a violation of Federal law 18 USC 926(a) that specificially prohibits political entities and government agencies at any level from establishing a system of registration or licensing for firearms and firearms owners.
Matt
Matt
Agreed, this means they already have a working map.
OK, someone needs to call NRA-ILA , GOA , etc....maybe their lawyers can request a FOIA and confront the Governator (oops, sorry, I thought this was Kalipornia!)!
Not lazy...just can't do it myself....
Not lazy...just can't do it myself....
That is not whatthe Tiarht amendment does. What it does is not provide funding for running traces or supplying compiled past trace requests to a local agency unless it is for a crime that occured in that jurisdiction.
There is nothing keeping states from keeping their own databasses and Point of Contact (POC) states that do their own background checks for purchases are capable of keeping such records. The fed law only applies to the ATF and FFL's federal records as I understand it.
But like I said in my other post, if MD is using the fed records of non-regulated firearms purchasers at the MD regulated dealers, then that is an invasion of privacy beyond state law about keeping such records and is one of those state police spying deals that is likely not enumerated in state law.
Is there? or does the question of firearms ownership come up in the protective order hearing and flagged from there.
The answer? We Do Not Know.
Trust me, I'd love to catch MSP illegally tracking firearms owners: combined with their earlier surveillance of peace activists as terrorists they would be about done in this state.
It's important to get our facts right. We know the other side won't.
That is a restriction on the fed government alone saying the fed government cannot keep the records or have registration and cannot use state property even to store the info. It does not keep states from doing so.
There is a state law mandating there be recordation of regulated firearms sales and there is a database of MD regulated firearms owners they keep. I have been told this by police officers, but I forget the name of the system. Maybe I will google it.
What we don't know is if they are alwo keeping non-regulated owner's information or if they are tracking gun owners when they move.
This is what I found, The MAFSS is the Maryland Automated Firearm Services System which is the database to make sure that MD regulated firearms dealer's sales were properly entered into the system and to make sure the background chekcs were done on MD regulated firearms transfers. The state police agents that "audit" MD regulated firearms dealers cannot demand to see the bound books, but they can "request" to.....and I guess they get a lot of yes responses from the dealers because the dealers don't want trouble from the MSP.
http://www.ola.state.md.us/Reports/Fiscal Compliance/Police07.pdf
I also found this:
http://www.mdle.net/fig.pdf
SigMatt
Ultimate Member
No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established.
I read it differently, novus. It says to me that it is illegal for Federal purchase records to be turned over to any government or political entity. That implies that the MSP cannot walk into a Maryland FFL, copy their 4473s and build a list of gun owners. Agreed on the regulated firearms issue since that is State level but even then I would argue that it could run afoul of this.
Considering that this provision of FOPA'86 has never been put to the test, it remains little more than a discussion point but it seems clear to me the intention of the act is to prevent the Government, at all levels, from establishing registries.
I'd love a 2A lawyer's opinion on an interpretation of this section. What's the point of a Federal law that applies to everyone against the Feds establishing a registry if individual states can violate it at will or even in collusion with each other (wink-and-nod) to fundamentally do the same thing the law prohibits? End result is the same whether done once at the Federal level or 50 times individually across each state.
Matt
wlc
Ultimate Member
- Nov 13, 2006
- 3,521
I think the slide is worded poorly
It really is showing individuals with protective orders that own guns.
There is no way that map is showing all gun owners in the state. Though I do not doubt they are tracking that.
It really is showing individuals with protective orders that own guns.
There is no way that map is showing all gun owners in the state. Though I do not doubt they are tracking that.
Todd v.
Ultimate Member
My guess would be that this protects the records held by gun stores but does not prevent MD from gathereing it's own records based of the sale of regulated firearms. When you buy one there is federal paperwork that goes to the ATF and paperwork that goes to the state of MD. The state of MD can keep their paperwork but they can't go and grab it from the gun stores or the ATF. Also, they would have no record of non regulated firearms as there is no state paperwork with the purchase... If they do then there is a problem.
Someone who buys a regulated firearm outside of MD and moves here with it should technically be off their books as well.
Someone who buys a regulated firearm outside of MD and moves here with it should technically be off their books as well.
- Jan 31, 2009
- 3,285
I don't see me on that map... No way that particular map has all gun owners on it.
doesn't mean they aren't doing it, but that map is not all gun owners
doesn't mean they aren't doing it, but that map is not all gun owners
The possible problem is though that MD regulated dealers also sell non-regulated and if the state police "requests" (
) to see their books and record those purchases too, then there is nothing to keep them from putting them in the database too as I see it.You would think....but there is nothing to keep states from sharing this private information with other states, so if someone moves here from New York, or from MD to NY, then they may be on a computer database somewhere as owning a handgun already and the state may put you "as a pin on a map" as being a potential gun owner as far as we know.
If I am on their map then they need to update it....all my guns fell overboard on a fateful boating trip on the Bay and I am no longer a gun owner.
Spot77
Ultimate Member
Perhaps, but it's just posturing. You'd be surprised at how few domestic violence murders were committed with a firearm in Md for the past few years. I can't recall the number, but I heard it at last week's hearing and I'm pretty sure everybody in the room was surprised at how few there were compared to beating deaths and stabbings.
Time for a little
When will they create the database of people who have protective orders against them and own knives, softball bats, tools, etc.
And since most domestic murders occur when alcohol is involved, why not make respondents of P.O.'s take a sobriety test every morning? Hell let's put the interlock system on their cars so they can't get drunk then drive over to their spouse/partner's place for a good game of slap-around?
No wait, even better, let's implant a GPS tracker in them that alerts the police when they come within 4 miles of the accuser! 4 miles should be a reasonable distance to allow police officers enough time to respond.
Ok, now I have the REAL answer....if there's enough evidence that the respondent to a protective order is dangerous, why don't we just charge him/her and lock him or her up?
Rattlesnake46319
Curmidget
Spot, you're using logic again. What have we told you about that?
hole punch
Paper Target Slayer
where can one see this map?
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
‘Why is nothing being done?’: Concerns grow about drug use, fighting in Montgomery Co. school bathrooms (1 Viewer)
- Started by RFBfromDE
- Replies: 10
-
-
