This shouldn't be a shock to anyone.

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/at...sonal-data

Quote: One of the data-collecting systems called Multiple Sales (MS) requires that multiple firearms purchased at once must be reported to ATF by the federal firearms licensee (FFL). ATF policy requires that the bureau internally removes particular data from multiple gun sales reports after two years if the firearm has not been traced to criminal activity. GAO found that ATF does not adhere to its own policy. In fact, “until May 2016, MS contained over 10,000 names that were not consistently deleted within the required 2 years.”

The report stated that the study was conducted to the ATF could improve its policies, but also stressed that the bureau has a role in “protecting the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners.” The report claims that ATF agreed with the report recommendations.

Another system called Access 2000, or A2K, establishes servers to be used by National Tracing Center (NTC) personnel. The NTC can electronically search FFLs’ records for certain information needed to track the history of a firearm.

While GAO’s investigation revealed that A2K for currently-operating FFLs complied with formal policy, A2K for out-of-business FFLs did not comply with the restrictions “because ATF maintained these data on a single server.” They were directed to get rid of this consolidated information and did so in March 2016. Furthermore, GAO found that ATF does not, but potentially should, have an outlined policy that specifies how out-of-business FFLs should submit documentation of compliance or share pertinent information.

But this can’t be the end of the story.

How is it possible that there is not a connection between the ATF deputy director lamenting that they can’t collect more personal information on gun owners, and the revelation that they were doing exactly that?

I had a feeling this **** was going on

(08-03-2016 10:21 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  I had a feeling this **** was going on

Of course it's going on. When they require paperwork, FFL's, etc, etc to buy guns why WOULDN'T they be stockpiling as much information as possible? It's nothing more than a gradual movement towards confiscation.

The solution is to purchase one firearm at a time from a store or multiple firearms at a time from a friend, neighbor, or colleague.

(08-03-2016 10:45 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The solution is to purchase one firearm at a time from a store or multiple firearms at a time from a friend, neighbor, or colleague.

Yep. I prefer my guns like Obama prefers his immigrants. Undocumented.

(08-03-2016 10:49 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 10:45 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The solution is to purchase one firearm at a time from a store or multiple firearms at a time from a friend, neighbor, or colleague.

Yep. I prefer my guns like Obama prefers his immigrants. Undocumented.

LOCK THE F'NG THREAD

(08-03-2016 10:49 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-03-2016 10:45 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The solution is to purchase one firearm at a time from a store or multiple firearms at a time from a friend, neighbor, or colleague.

Yep. I prefer my guns like Obama prefers his immigrants. Undocumented.

That was a good one Kaplony.

Kaplony didn't choose the thug life, the thug life chose him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvTdDXfoiEk&t=0m38s

We are here to help you we are with the government.

When a gun grabber asks me why I am hesitant for deep background checks.... THIS!

I would be fine with a total and deep check but I don't trust the government to get rid of the information once they have it in their talons.

Taking a line from Stink, see line number one below in my signature.

Sheesh, why are you surprised? I told you that they could/would do that when you buy your weapon. Someone said I was dumb that they couldn't. Maybe I am but I have a lot of common sense.