NY to spend $28M to create statewide gun permit database

[Doc]

Well, this new database is just for handguns, they have always had the info on private handgun sales anyhow.

That's what I thought. Frankly I am shocked that the information isn't accumulated in Albany already. That's what makes me wonder if there isn't something I'm missing about this $28 million dollar database. What could there possibly be there that would cost that kind of money. There has to be more to the story.

 

The other thing that I find curious is what do they currently do with all the county databases. I'm sure law enforcement must use them in their investigations. Are there other purposes and uses or is it all just gun-owner harrassment .... lol?

[WNYBuckHunter]

Who knows, but I was under the impression that there is already a state database of handguns and permits. Maybe they are just revamping the system to consolidate things. Part of the SAFE act was to standardize the pistol permit processes, fees, etc. wasnt it?

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I thought just handguns were before. I knw all new long guns purchases we on record with dealer  only before but now all that plus the private sales will be on this combined database, I think???? I haven't heard anyone say they know for sure. Perhaps that is by design as well.

[WNYBuckHunter]

What this article is talking about is just handguns.

 

They are not supposed to compile the background check data AFAIK.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I thought they were going to include all the other information they are collecting....what was I thinking. silly me.

[tuckersdaddy]

Hey Doc i understand your train of thought, but try this perspective. the current database is at the county level, managed by the county clerk, back ground checks are done by the sheriff, and approvals are done by the judge....ALL elected local offices. when its moved to albany, management and background checks  are done by the state police, whose chief is appointed by the governer. little to no accountabilty is built in. if they misuse or abuse the system, you cant get rid of the offending person by simply voting them out, they would have to be accused, investigated, prossicuted,then maybe removed. Yes, all the information can now be found, but thats one more layer of checks and balances removed. as we all know how ever nyc votes is how the state goes, and i would prefer that info be kept here in my home county rather then some server in albany that the downstaters control. hope this perspective helps answer your question.

[Doc]

Hey Doc i understand your train of thought, but try this perspective. the current database is at the county level, managed by the county clerk, back ground checks are done by the sheriff, and approvals are done by the judge....ALL elected local offices. when its moved to albany, management and background checks  are done by the state police, whose chief is appointed by the governer. little to no accountabilty is built in. if they misuse or abuse the system, you cant get rid of the offending person by simply voting them out, they would have to be accused, investigated, prossicuted,then maybe removed. Yes, all the information can now be found, but thats one more layer of checks and balances removed. as we all know how ever nyc votes is how the state goes, and i would prefer that info be kept here in my home county rather then some server in albany that the downstaters control. hope this perspective helps answer your question.

Well, see this is another one of the details that I was hoping would come out of this discussion. I have not heard one word about whether anything other than the location of the database will be changing. All I have heard so far is that relocation is the only change. I haven't heard about any other changes as to the administration of the permitting system. See, if they are uprooting the whole registration system, they are keeping that pretty quiet. As far as I know the local sheriffs and judges will still be involved in their duties, and the results will simply be inputted to Albany's computer, probably much like we handle car licensing. Without any other facts, I have to assume that the activity is simply moving data from local locations to Albany. If there are other planned parts to it, I am hoping that will be brought out by those that have a more complete understanding than I do.

[WNYBuckHunter]

I thought they were going to include all the other information they are collecting....what was I thinking. silly me.

Lol, who knows what they will really do. I am hoping that most aspects of pistol permits will stay the same, and just the records go to the state level. I like being able to carry my purchase tickets around and use them when I choose.

[Doc]

Ok, so apparently there really isn't a whole lot of info (known to the public) about anything that may go along with the creation of this database, or really any known problems to us that we don't already have with existing registration databases. So, unless some insider comes along I guess we know about as much as anybody.

 

So let's try another question about something that does have a bit of a public track record. Other than proving that a background check has been performed and that you have a legal right to possess your pistol, what other purposes does registration databases perform. In other words, who accesses them and why? That might help me understand the value of these databases and whether it is worth $28 million to improve the data storage system. Are there other purposes, perhaps as an aid to law enforcement in some way? How do proponents of the registration system try to justify the cost of maintaining these databases?

[NFA-ADK]

A centralized data base will make confiscations and access to the information simple. No more dealing with local authorities for the info... It will give access on the state level as opposed to the local level.  (Bad for us, good for them...)  This will give a much broader range of information to the state and is the next step in confiscation.  And will give more power for the state to enact new laws and enforce them to all registered owners.  If you do not think they will tax these know gun owners you are living in a fantasy...  IT's coming...  The state will do anything for more money and this is just the next step in that process of eliminating gun ownership.  IMO

 

All though we do not have all the info on this, more control is the goal.  Next to include all long rifle purchases and assault rifles.  This way when they do come to your house they know how many guns they should leave with.  More control at the state level is bad for owners plain and simple.  Even though we don't have all the info, you can bet they have a larger plan at stake and this is just the next step to removal of all weapons, anyone who can not see this is not realizing what is happening. 

 

NYS does not want you to own fire arms...  Plain and simple...  And they are working to take that away.  With the assault rifle ban, registration, state data base on all gun owners and more laws being enacted every week it's hard for me to see it any other way... 

 

More control is the goal...  They do not understand it so they want to control it...  No I will not support any gun registration or data base at the state level.  It is just more government control over something they see as a direct threat and if you can't see that well I don't know what to say...

 

Every law we LET them pass is another part of watering down your rights as a owner...  And that I will not support no matter how insignificant it might seem...  That includes any state controlled data base.

 

NFA-GETSOME

[Doc]

I understand all the potentials, and I understand all the problems with the NYS Safe Act. Right now I am concerned with the new database ..... only. My investigation is for the composition of letters to legislators, and I am only interested in current facts about the database. When I write to a legislator, I do not like to engage in "might happens", or "Could lead tos". These guys don't want their time wasted with imaginings, or theorizing  or other kinds of fortune-telling. I want my letters to get right to the point with documented complaints. I am not saying that all these things that you all are thinking might happen, or the government motives aren't exactly as evil as you all describe them. But I have found that legislators stop paying attention when you come off with the doom and gloom predictions no matter how truthful we feel they are. That is why I have tried to keep focused on only those things that we know are documented and quantifiable. It's the one approach that sets us apart from the emotional rantings of the anti-gun people, and I believe it is the one thing that keeps credibility on our side. So when I ask for downsides to the centralized location of registration data, I am talking about things that are known and proveable. An example is the exhorbitant cost of this database. That is published fact that I can point to and argue about in a letter to those that have positions of power to help do something about it. I have already launched into the litany of reasons for my opposition to the NYS Safe Act in other letters. Now I want to pass on my objections to the centralized database without going through all that other stuff again. And I want to do it with facts not theories and opinions. So far I haven't been getting the info I was hoping for, and I am beginning to believe that it is not really known to the public.

 

 

[tuckersdaddy]

I understand all the potentials, and I understand all the problems with the NYS Safe Act. Right now I am concerned with the new database ..... only. My investigation is for the composition of letters to legislators, and I am only interested in current facts about the database. When I write to a legislator, I do not like to engage in "might happens", or "Could lead tos". These guys don't want their time wasted with imaginings, or theorizing  or other kinds of fortune-telling. I want my letters to get right to the point with documented complaints. I am not saying that all these things that you all are thinking might happen, or the government motives aren't exactly as evil as you all describe them. But I have found that legislators stop paying attention when you come off with the doom and gloom predictions no matter how truthful we feel they are. That is why I have tried to keep focused on only those things that we know are documented and quantifiable. It's the one approach that sets us apart from the emotional rantings of the anti-gun people, and I believe it is the one thing that keeps credibility on our side. So when I ask for downsides to the centralized location of registration data, I am talking about things that are known and proveable. An example is the exhorbitant cost of this database. That is published fact that I can point to and argue about in a letter to those that have positions of power to help do something about it. I have already launched into the litany of reasons for my opposition to the NYS Safe Act in other letters. Now I want to pass on my objections to the centralized database without going through all that other stuff again. And I want to do it with facts not theories and opinions. So far I haven't been getting the info I was hoping for, and I am beginning to believe that it is not really known to the public.

 

Doc my original statement is fact. the manager (state police) of the data base do not have to answer to the citizens of the state, they answer to cuomo. they have no accountability to us. in your letter simply ask what the accountability is of the manager of the data base. no emotion, no gripping an honest straight forward question that will make them think. Ask them what the protocols are for correcting errors. how are grievences handled. just ask questions. make them try to find answers that dont exsist.

[Doc]

Doc my original statement is fact. the manager (state police) of the data base do not have to answer to the citizens of the state, they answer to cuomo. they have no accountability to us. in your letter simply ask what the accountability is of the manager of the data base. no emotion, no gripping an honest straight forward question that will make them think. Ask them what the protocols are for correcting errors. how are grievences handled. just ask questions. make them try to find answers that dont exsist.

Excellent idea. But I have to ask, what accountability do we have with the current system.

 

But I do like the idea of asking questions. Perhaps I will take that approach. Before I do that though, I would like to have a more thorough understanding of the purposes of the database. Who uses it and for what purposes. That may help frame my questions in a direction ... lol.

[tuckersdaddy]

Excellent idea. But I have to ask, what accountability do we have with the current system.

 

But I do like the idea of asking questions. Perhaps I will take that approach. Before I do that though, I would like to have a more thorough understanding of the purposes of the database. Who uses it and for what purposes. That may help frame my questions in a direction ... lol.

 

those 3 questions may be the perfect opening questions in your letters! as for current accountability, your county clerk is the manager. you have a greater chance of access with that person (normally you can see them face to face) then you will with the head of the state police, and if things get way out of line you can vote the clerk out (most counties that im aware of its an elected position). 

[Doc]

See how often we are expected to have opinions on things that no one seems to know a whole lot about? ..... lol. Trying to get a little background on some of these things is like pulling teeth. No wonder so much BS is slipped into law without anybody knowing it. It's is like a dozen full-time jobs just trying to stay half-ways informed. It really is frustrating, and an impossible task.