Are your rights being violated

The Wife listens to NPR in the mornings while getting ready for work.

A couple mornings ago I was listening in while she was getting ready and heard something very wrong. I will need your help with this because I’m not sure what to do with it.

It was an NPR piece on California’s gun confiscation program. (though they’re not calling it that). Basically, the state is going through their backlogs of criminal and metal health records and cross checking this list with their list of registered firearms owners to see who needs their door booted in. They then send a crew of armed individuals with gun and badges to do the deed.

I knew about it and I am sure that you also knew about it. So I was only half listening so as to not get my blood pressure up too high before sunrise. And then I heard this:

They are all people who at one time purchased firearms legally, but have since run afoul of the law, Yo says. “Such as maybe a felony conviction, mental health commitment, they received a restraining order, domestic violence restraining order — some type of a misdemeanor conviction that prohibits them from possessing firearms.”

Beginning In 2007, California officials began collecting names from court records, medical facilities and lists of known or wanted criminals, then cross-referenced them against the federal instant criminal background check system for gun-buyers. The list is updated every day.

I could not rewind the program so I went to the website and found the article to confirm what was stated.

My confusion is as follows: Did the NPR reporter, Richard Gonzalez, get this wrong and he actually meant the California program that approves/disapproves firearms transfers? Or is he correct and the State of California and the NICS are swapping information?

We need an answer to this, and sooner would be better than later. How would I go about this?

This entry was posted in Order of the imperial upraised middle finger.. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Are your rights being violated

  1. Petey says:

    Apparently the state of California processes the checks themselves.

    See also:

    Steve Buford: “In California, the courts are required to send that information to us electronically and, in some cases, on paper. We take that information. We upload it to our California system, and then the California system also feeds into the federal system.”

  2. Davidwhitewolf says:

    I posted a query on Calguns, will update here.

  3. Pingback: Crunch Time in Cali | Random Nuclear Strikes

  4. Davidwhitewolf says:

    Calguns commenter “dustoff31” stated, in response to my query:

    “It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if CA is using NICS for the purpose you describe. Some other states use it for similar purposes, for example, KY runs NICS checks monthly on all CCW holders in the state.”

    He also noted, very helpfully:

    “Some states have made arrangements with the FBI to act as a full or partial central point of contact for all FFLs in that state. CA is a full POC state.

    In CA, the DOJ makes the call (electronically) to NICS rather than as the FFL would do in a free state. ….”

    Participation Map

    Thirteen states have agencies acting on behalf of the NICS in a full Point-Of-Contact (POC) capacity. These POC states, which have agreed to implement and maintain their own Brady NICS Program, conduct firearm background checks for FFLs’ transactions in their respective states by electronically accessing the NICS. Upon completion of the required ATF Form 4473, the FFLs conducting business in the POC states contact a designated state agency to initiate a NICS background check in lieu of contacting the NICS Section.

    Additionally, seven states are currently sharing responsibility with the NICS Section by acting as partial POCs. Partial-POC states have agencies designated to conduct checks for handguns and/or handgun permits, while the NICS Section handles the processing of the states transactions for long gun purchases. The NICS Participation Map, as illustrated below, depicts each state’s level of participation with the NICS.

    So then the remaining question, I think, is whether or not it is lawful under Federal law for the California Bureau of Firearms to access NICS for reasons unrelated to a new firearms purchase.

    Of course, if unlawful, who’s going to prosecute them for it?

Comments are closed.