1.4 million Obama amnesty applicants on deportation hit list

[raykeller]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/1.4-million-obama-amnesty-applicants-on-deportation-hit-list/article/2607171


1.4 million Obama amnesty applicants on deportation hit list
By Paul Bedard


Some 1.4 million illegals who followed President Obama's request to sign up
for two controversial amnesty programs could be among the first to face
deportation under the new administration.

The reason: In exchange for getting into the two programs, they handed over
their identities, home addresses, and admitted to being in the United States
illegally, making them the easiest to find and legally deport.

"I was surprised anyone would be stupid enough to sign up for DACA (Deferred
Action for Childhood Arrivals) and DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of
Americans). Yet apparently hundreds of thousands of people did so anyway,"
said John Miano of the Center for Immigration Studies.

He said in a blog post that the programs are dead under a Trump
administration and those who signed up "created a list of prime candidates
for deportation with names, addresses, and an admission of illegal alien
status."

Secrets has already received reports that illegals are already starting to
leave the country. One source said that some in Virginia left for the border
on Wednesday, the day Donald Trump was declared the winner.

The agency that took the names, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services,
has on file 1,443,762 names of applicants for DACA and DAPA. They break down
this way:

â?" 1 million are from Mexico.

â?" 119,788 are from the three countries from which thousands of youths fled
in the last three years, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

â?" Over half, 607,000 live in California and Texas.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Just Wondering]

And probably voted for Hiliary.

[Steve from Colorado]

On 11/11/2016 12:00 PM, raykeller wrote:

One has to wonder if some same gender couples who took advantage of
"civil unions" and same sex marriage, or people purchasing marijuana in
states that made cannabis quasi-legal will rue the day they got on
certain lists or registries as the proverbial "pendulum" swings toward
the "alt-right," if you will. Things could change in a nasty direction
for all the celebs who flaunted their gayness or their love for illegals
and Muslims, in this new political climate which is reminiscent of
Germany after the Versailles Treaty in 1918 in some respects.

--


Call for secession in US Massachusetts province hampered by lack of
arms and military training, over-abundance of critical theory professors

— DPRK News Service (@DPRK_News) November 9, 2016

www.globalgulag.us

[Just Wondering]

On 11/11/2016 5:00 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, raykeller@looser_losers.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/1.4-million-obama-amnesty-applicants-on-deportation-hit-list/article/2607171

>> Some 1.4 million illegals who followed President Obama's request to sign up
>> for two controversial amnesty programs could be among the first to face
>> deportation under the new administration.
>>
>> The reason: In exchange for getting into the two programs, they handed over
>> their identities, home addresses, and admitted to being in the United States
>> illegally, making them the easiest to find and legally deport.
>

> When you get done chortling, reflect that your firearms are on a list
> too unless you bought every one of them privately.
>
Let's examine that claim. What list would that be?

[Jim Wilkins]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message
news:59qe2cheo4p23comv...@4ax.com...

> The form you fill out at the gun store. Law says check them out and
> dump. BATF says no way in hell they are going to do that.
>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_4473
"The dealer also records all information from the Form 4473 into a
required "bound-book" called an "Acquisition and Disposition Log. A
dealer must keep this on file at least 20 years, and is required to
surrender the log to the ATF upon retirement from the firearms
business."

[RD Sandman]

Winston_Smith <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in
news:59qe2cheo4p23comv...@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 03:11:38 -0700, Just Wondering wrote:

> The form you fill out at the gun store. Law says check them out and
> dump. BATF says no way in hell they are going to do that.
>

4473's are saved by the FFL until he (or she) dies or goes out of business.
The ATF may even come in and look through them once or twice per year if
necessary.

--

RD Sandman

Airspeed, altitude and brains....two of the three are always
required to complete a mission.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[RD Sandman]

"Jim Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> wrote in news:o07q73$k85$1@dont-
email.me:

Bingo!!!

[Just Wondering]

On 11/12/2016 12:11 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 03:11:38 -0700, Just Wondering wrote:

> The form you fill out at the gun store. Law says check them out and
> dump. BATF says no way in hell they are going to do that.
>

That's it? That's all you've got? There are approximately 79 thousand
FFL holders who sell 12 million new firearms and millions more used
firearms annually. Over time that amounts over 150 million FFL firearm
sales. The only place those sales are recorded are on paper (not
electronic records) stored by each FFL holder. There is no central
repository in any form containing that information. In other words,
there is no single "list" ANYWHERE of FFL sales.

Moreover, "As of July 2004, approved purchaser information must be
destroyed within 24 hours of the official NICS response to the dealer.20
This destruction requirement has been imposed in appropriations bills as
part of the so-called “Tiahrt Amendments,” named after their chief
proponent Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-KS). As a result, ATF inspectors are no
longer able to compare the information on file with the dealer to the
information the dealer submitted to NICS."
http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/gun-dealer-sales/maintaining-records-on-gun-sales/

So, if you call boxes of musty old papers spread out over 79 thousand
discrete locations a list, I suppose you can do that, but most people
would not call that a list. Good look locating any one particular
needle in that very large haystack. (Chortle)

[Just Wondering]

On 11/12/2016 12:24 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

> "Winston_Smith" wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 03:11:38 -0700, Just Wondering wrote:
>>> On 11/11/2016 5:00 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>
>>>> When you get done chortling, reflect that your firearms are
>>>> on a list too unless you bought every one of them privately.
>>>>
>>> Let's examine that claim. What list would that be?
>>
>> The form you fill out at the gun store. Law says check them out
>> and dump. BATF says no way in hell they are going to do that.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_4473
> "The dealer also records all information from the Form 4473 into a
> required "bound-book" called an "Acquisition and Disposition Log. A
> dealer must keep this on file at least 20 years, and is required to
> surrender the log to the ATF upon retirement from the firearms
> business."
>

Yes, a "bound book" - a paper record, NO electronic data base, and NO
central repository. In fact, the federal government is prohibited by
law from compiling a centralized list of those sales. Actually, there
are stacks of bound books spread out over 80,000 different privately
owned locations, with no ready means of locating any one particular sale
record.

[Just Wondering]

On 11/12/2016 2:44 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Winston_Smith <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:

>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 Just Wondering wrote:
>>> On 11/11/2016 5:00 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>
>>>> When you get done chortling, reflect that your firearms are on a list
>>>> too unless you bought every one of them privately.
>>>>
>>> Let's examine that claim. What list would that be?
>>
>> The form you fill out at the gun store. Law says check them out and
>> dump. BATF says no way in hell they are going to do that.
>>
>
> 4473's are saved by the FFL until he (or she) dies or goes out of business.
> The ATF may even come in and look through them once or twice per year if
> necessary.
>

"Q11: What happens to the data provided on Form 4473?
Completed Forms 4473 are retained by the Federal firearms licensee
(FFL). ATF does not, and never has, maintained an archive or other
information repository on the race or ethnicity of firearm purchasers or
licensees, and it has no intention to do so in the future. ATF may
inspect individual Forms 4473 containing personally identifying
information held by FFLs only for limited regulatory or law enforcement
functions-specifically, during inspections, and in the course of
investigations (for example, when tracing firearms linked to individual
criminal investigations). Similarly, the FFL may use the demographic
data to ensure proper identification or facilitate the background check
process. There are some limited circumstances – for example when an FFL
goes out of business – under which the Forms 4473 or information
contained thereon is provided to ATF as required by statute. Even under
these limited circumstances, ATF does not aggregate or centralize the
demographic information contained on the form."
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/atf-form-4473-faqs#Q11-4473

There are nearly 80,000 FFL holders who sell over 12 million guns per
year. There are only about 2,400 active ATF agents, who have better
things to do with their time than inspecting tens of millions of old FFL
sales records. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but such inspections
are necessarily infrequent and cursory.

[rbowman]

On 11/13/2016 01:44 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
> Yes, a "bound book" - a paper record, NO electronic data base, and NO
> central repository. In fact, the federal government is prohibited by
> law from compiling a centralized list of those sales. Actually, there
> are stacks of bound books spread out over 80,000 different privately
> owned locations, with no ready means of locating any one particular sale
> record.

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/852/1522/451442/

The entire article is lengthy but the salient point is Andrew Barnhill
dropped a handgun during an armored car robbery at Ukiah, CA. Evidence
was produced that he had purchased the firearm in Missoula, MT. Other
than the 4473, there is no registration, permit, or other paperwork
required to purchase a handgun in Montana. So, how did they pull that
rabbit out of their hat?

[rbowman]

On 11/12/2016 02:44 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> 4473's are saved by the FFL until he (or she) dies or goes out of business.
> The ATF may even come in and look through them once or twice per year if
> necessary.

Or when they're on a fishing trip...

[rbowman]

On 11/13/2016 01:38 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
> So, if you call boxes of musty old papers spread out over 79 thousand
> discrete locations a list, I suppose you can do that, but most people
> would not call that a list. Good look locating any one particular
> needle in that very large haystack. (Chortle)

So, if a firearm used in the commission of a crime is found in Sand
Point ID they might start looking inquiring at sporting goods stores in
Mobile AL?

[Terry Coombs]

No . Actually they start at the other end of the possession chain , the
manufacturer .
--
Snag

[RD Sandman]

rbowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote in news:e8rq50FsbjkU1
@mid.individual.net:

They go to the manufacturer who serializes all the guns they produce. Then
they track it to the distributor who has the records of what dealer
received that gun. The dealer has the 4473 which contains the pertinent
information on who it was sold to. From that point, things could get murky
depending who how honest the buyer is and state laws.

[RD Sandman]

Just Wondering <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:PRVVz.72184$vF2....@fx43.iad:

> On 11/12/2016 2:44 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Winston_Smith <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 Just Wondering wrote:
>>>> On 11/11/2016 5:00 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>>> When you get done chortling, reflect that your firearms are on a
>>>>> list too unless you bought every one of them privately.
>>>>>
>>>> Let's examine that claim. What list would that be?
>>>
>>> The form you fill out at the gun store. Law says check them out and
>>> dump. BATF says no way in hell they are going to do that.
>>>
>>
>> 4473's are saved by the FFL until he (or she) dies or goes out of
>> business. The ATF may even come in and look through them once or
>> twice per year if necessary.
>>
> "Q11: What happens to the data provided on Form 4473?

Supposedly nothing unless it is part of an investigation into a crime.

> Completed Forms 4473 are retained by the Federal firearms licensee
> (FFL). ATF does not, and never has, maintained an archive or other
> information repository on the race or ethnicity of firearm purchasers
> or licensees, and it has no intention to do so in the future.

Which, officially or not, does not stop the agent from scribbling down
the name of the purchaser.

ATF may
> inspect individual Forms 4473 containing personally identifying
> information held by FFLs only for limited regulatory or law
> enforcement functions-specifically, during inspections, and in the
> course of investigations (for example, when tracing firearms linked to
> individual criminal investigations).

Correct.

Similarly, the FFL may use the
> demographic data to ensure proper identification or facilitate the
> background check process. There are some limited circumstances – for
> example when an FFL goes out of business

Yep.

– under which the Forms 4473
> or information contained thereon is provided to ATF as required by
> statute. Even under these limited circumstances, ATF does not
> aggregate or centralize the demographic information contained on the
> form." https://www.atf.gov/firearms/atf-form-4473-faqs#Q11-4473
>
> There are nearly 80,000 FFL holders who sell over 12 million guns per
> year. There are only about 2,400 active ATF agents, who have better
> things to do with their time than inspecting tens of millions of old
> FFL sales records. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but such
> inspections are necessarily infrequent and cursory.

Unless it is under the course of an investigation as you mentioned above.
Even then only the individual 4473 is to be copied or provide data on the
first purchaser.

[RD Sandman]

rbowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote in
news:e8rq64...@mid.individual.net:

Always possible, it is the government, after all.

[RD Sandman]

rbowman <bow...@montana.com> wrote in news:e8rqbuFsbjkU3
@mid.individual.net:

LOL! They would go the manufacturer of the firearm to see where it went
when it was produced.

[RD Sandman]

"Terry Coombs" <snag...@msn.com> wrote in
news:o0ad1m$ie7$1...@dont-email.me:

Which they do to get to the other end of the chain...the original
purchaser.

[Jim Wilkins]

"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:e8rqbu...@mid.individual.net...

Don't sit by the phone waiting for the FBI's recruiting call.

--Clouseau

[Just Wondering]

On 11/13/2016 7:35 AM, Winston_Smith wrote:

> On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 01:38:46 -0700, Just Wondering wrote:
>> On 11/12/2016 12:11 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 03:11:38 -0700, Just Wondering wrote:
>
>>>> Let's examine that claim. What list would that be?
>>>
>>> The form you fill out at the gun store. Law says check them out and
>>> dump. BATF says no way in hell they are going to do that.
>>>
>> That's it? That's all you've got? There are approximately 79 thousand
>> FFL holders who sell 12 million new firearms and millions more used
>> firearms annually. Over time that amounts over 150 million FFL firearm
>> sales. The only place those sales are recorded are on paper (not
>> electronic records) stored by each FFL holder. There is no central
>> repository in any form containing that information. In other words,
>> there is no single "list" ANYWHERE of FFL sales.
>

> Obviously you have a horse you want to flog. Be my guest. Fact is the
> gun store contacts the BATF, says this guy wants to buy a gun, is he
> OK. They get back a number and add it to the form I filled and I get
> the gun.
>
> At a minimum, the BATF has name, identifying ID to separate me from
> 100 people with the same name, date of purchase, and FFL dealer.
> That's in a computer.
> If they just have my name, they have my address, age, etc.
>
BATFE doesn't. To repeat,

"As of July 2004, approved purchaser information must be destroyed

within 24 hours of the official NICS response to the dealer. This

destruction requirement has been imposed in appropriations bills as part
of the so-called “Tiahrt Amendments,” named after their chief proponent
Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-KS). As a result, ATF inspectors are no longer able
to compare the information on file with the dealer to the information
the dealer submitted to NICS."
http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/gun-dealer-sales/maintaining-records-on-gun-sales/

Which makes your preceding comment bullshit, and you already knew it was
bullshit when you typed it.

> At least one gun store in my area now has you fill out the form on a
> computer. I have no idea if they just print it or if the record is
> kept electronically now. Clearly paper records of any kind are
> disappearing. It won't be another decade before paper records are
> virtually extinct or at best redundant.
>
Wow, you must have crystal balls, to be able to see into the future.
But suppose you're right. In the meantime, a decade from now there will
already be 600 million gun out there, most of them still won't be in
your system, and a huge part of those will have gone through private
sales where no record is kept anyway.

>> Moreover, "As of July 2004, approved purchaser information must be
>> destroyed within 24 hours of the official NICS response to the dealer.20
>> This destruction requirement has been imposed in appropriations bills as
>> part of the so-called “Tiahrt Amendments,” named after their chief
>> proponent Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-KS). As a result, ATF inspectors are no
>> longer able to compare the information on file with the dealer to the
>> information the dealer submitted to NICS."
>> http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/gun-dealer-sales/maintaining-records-on-gun-sales/
>>

> Yes, you are right. I already wrote that. THE LAW SAYS. And the feds
> say - right out loud in public - they have no intention of destroying
> those records. Theory and practice often differ.
>
Please provide a cite where BATFE has publicly stated that
it is violating the Tiahrt Amendments.

[Just Wondering]

If I had to guess, I'd say it was something like this:
FBI has the gun, forwards the serial number to BATFE.
BATFE checks the records it receives from gun manufacturers, which
identifies the FFL dealer the manufacturer shipped the gun to and
probably when it was shipped.
BATFE (or perhaps FBI, I don't know the interagency workings) goes to
the dealer and asks to see its records from that date forward.
Dealer retrieves its bound records from storage.
Federal agent spends who knows how many hours, laboring over those
records year by year, page by page, sale by sale. Eventually the agent
finds, buried in those bound books, the entry for the sale of that gun.
Sometimes it may be worth while to search for the needle in the
haystack. But like I said, there is no ready means of locating any one
particular sales record.

[Just Wondering]

On 11/13/2016 12:29 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Just Wondering <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in
> news:PRVVz.72184$vF2....@fx43.iad:
>
>> On 11/12/2016 2:44 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>> Winston_Smith <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2016 Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>> On 11/11/2016 5:00 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> When you get done chortling, reflect that your firearms are on a
>>>>>> list too unless you bought every one of them privately.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Let's examine that claim. What list would that be?
>>>>
>>>> The form you fill out at the gun store. Law says check them out and
>>>> dump. BATF says no way in hell they are going to do that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 4473's are saved by the FFL until he (or she) dies or goes out of
>>> business. The ATF may even come in and look through them once or
>>> twice per year if necessary.
>>>
>> "Q11: What happens to the data provided on Form 4473?
>
> Supposedly nothing unless it is part of an investigation into a crime.
>
>> Completed Forms 4473 are retained by the Federal firearms licensee
>> (FFL). ATF does not, and never has, maintained an archive or other
>> information repository on the race or ethnicity of firearm purchasers
>> or licensees, and it has no intention to do so in the future.
>
> Which, officially or not, does not stop the agent from scribbling down
> the name of the purchaser.
>

The agent never sees anything that links a particular gun to a
particular purchaser. And a lot of NICS background checks are done
electronically through the NICS E-Check System, so an agent never sees
it at all.

[Just Wondering]

On 11/13/2016 12:35 PM, RD Sandman wrote:

> "Terry Coombs" <snag...@msn.com> wrote:
>> rbowman wrote:
>>> On 11/13/2016 01:38 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>>> So, if you call boxes of musty old papers spread out over 79
>>>> thousand discrete locations a list, I suppose you can do that, but
>>>> most people would not call that a list. Good look locating any one
>>>> particular needle in that very large haystack. (Chortle)
>>>
>>> So, if a firearm used in the commission of a crime is found in Sand
>>> Point ID they might start looking inquiring at sporting goods stores
>>> in Mobile AL?
>>
>> No . Actually they start at the other end of the possession chain ,
>> the manufacturer.
>
> Which they do to get to the other end of the chain...the original
> purchaser.
>

Which may NOT be the other end of the chain. The other end of the chain
may be a dead end. There might be a series of private sales after the
original purchaser, or the gun might be stolen, etc., leaving no record
whatsoever of who is at the other end of the chain.

[RD Sandman]

Just Wondering <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in

news:Dr4Wz.68958$DF2....@fx34.iad:

I'd drink to that but there are always going to be abuses.

[RD Sandman]

Just Wondering <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in news:Tu4Wz.31040$mI2.2214
@fx08.iad:

> On 11/13/2016 12:35 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> "Terry Coombs" <snag...@msn.com> wrote:
>>> rbowman wrote:
>>>> On 11/13/2016 01:38 AM, Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>> So, if you call boxes of musty old papers spread out over 79
>>>>> thousand discrete locations a list, I suppose you can do that, but
>>>>> most people would not call that a list. Good look locating any
one
>>>>> particular needle in that very large haystack. (Chortle)
>>>>
>>>> So, if a firearm used in the commission of a crime is found in Sand
>>>> Point ID they might start looking inquiring at sporting goods stores
>>>> in Mobile AL?
>>>
>>> No . Actually they start at the other end of the possession chain ,
>>> the manufacturer.
>>
>> Which they do to get to the other end of the chain...the original
>> purchaser.
>>
> Which may NOT be the other end of the chain.

It most likely is as far as he can go.....unless it is a state with an
FFL requirement for further transfer....there are a couple. Then it may
be able to be traced further but most likely that is the end of the line.

The other end of the chain
> may be a dead end.

Yep. Which is one reason why universal background checks won't work
without the companion of registration which may or may not be followed.

There might be a series of private sales after the
> original purchaser, or the gun might be stolen, etc., leaving no record
> whatsoever of who is at the other end of the chain.

The chain I was speaking was the to the original purchaser, at which
point whatever chain there was has most likely ended.

[news16]

On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 13:52:00 -0700, Just Wondering wrote:

> Federal agent spends who knows how many hours, laboring over those
> records year by year, page by page, sale by sale. Eventually the agent
> finds, buried in those bound books, the entry for the sale of that gun.
> Sometimes it may be worth while to search for the needle in the
> haystack. But like I said, there is no ready means of locating any one
> particular sales record.

If they are still doing it by hand, then their boses need dismissing.
Hire a bunch of data entry people and computerise the books makes is very
easy for future searching. OCR may work, but generally good data entry is
far superior.

[PaxPerPoten]

The Feds are not supposed to keep those records and there is no reason
for the FFl holder to have the extra expense to have a computer data
base. So the legitimate method of tracing the buyer would be by going
over the logbook page by unsorted page until the right serial number
appeared. Extremely tedious.. My money is on the Feds braking the Law(As
usual) and keeping the paperwork and having it on a readily searchable
Data base. I know for a fact that when a raid on a Meth house is planned
the Feds do a search of some data base to see if Weapons are on board.
Which is usually a joke as most criminals purchase illegal weapons as
they have a previous felony or do not wish to advertise their arsenal. A
lot of weapons are purchased at pawn shops with forged identity or
stolen identity documents. Pawn shops could care less and usually make
sure the purchase is made out of sight of the Cameras.
>


--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster

[Just Wondering]

No can do. 18 U.S. Code § 926(a):
"The Attorney General may prescribe only such rules and regulations
as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter ...
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."

[Just Wondering]

On 11/13/2016 7:33 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:

> On Sun, 13 Nov 2016 13:57:48 -0700, Just Wondering wrote:
>
>> The agent never sees anything that links a particular gun to a
>> particular purchaser. And a lot of NICS background checks are done
>> electronically through the NICS E-Check System, so an agent never sees
>> it at all.
>

> I'm not worried whether any particular agent sees it or not. I'm
> worried a future POTUS/Congress decides on a policy. The NICS E-Check
> is just a computer, so we are right back to a list/database a computer
> can spit out on command. Neatly sorted to make pickups as efficient as
> school bus routes.
>
28 CFR 25.9(b)(1)(iii):
"In cases of NICS Audit Log records relating to allowed
transactions, all identifying information submitted by or on
behalf of the transferee will be destroyed within 24 hours
after the FFL receives communication of the determination that
the transfer may proceed. All other information, except the
NTN and date, will be destroyed after not more than 90 days
from the date of inquiry."

[Just Wondering]

On 11/14/2016 4:15 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:

> How many times do you think it will take of your repeating this
> snippet to prove your point?
>
> It's BS but feel free to believe it with my blessings.
>
Repeat? This is the first time I posted this federal regulations. It's
interesting that you call a first-time post a repeat.

It's also interesting that you consider a federal regulation to be BS.
The Code of Federal Regulations isn't anyone's opinion, it is the law.

Or maybe you're just that ignorant that you don't know that CFR stands
for Code of Federal Regulations and has the force of federal law.

[Jim Wilkins]

"Winston_Smith" <inv...@butterfly.net> wrote in message

news:mfkk2cp2boj7h1ngt...@4ax.com...

> On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 16:47:52 -0700, Just Wondering wrote:
>>On 11/14/2016 4:15 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
>
>>> How many times do you think it will take of your repeating this
>>> snippet to prove your point?
>>>
>>> It's BS but feel free to believe it with my blessings.
>>>
>>Repeat? This is the first time I posted this federal regulations.
>>It's
>>interesting that you call a first-time post a repeat.
>

> The same as when you used Wikipedia as your source.

>
>>It's also interesting that you consider a federal regulation to be
>>BS.
>>The Code of Federal Regulations isn't anyone's opinion, it is the
>>law.
>

> Tell that to the BATF.
>
> So are the laws on handling classified information. Seems there are
> entitled and special people around.

There's also a new sheriff in town who don't owe them nuthin.

[news16]

they just pay the private sector to convert, hold, search ( and then
destroy).

[Just Wondering]

That's cryptic. What do you mean?