Close Menu
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
Trending

Libel Suit by “King of Vape” Against N.Y. Post, Over Allegations of Misconduct and Anti-Israel Actions, Thrown Out but May Be Refiled

57 minutes ago

ARK Invest Buys $15M Coinbase Shares After Recent Selling

1 hour ago

The ATF Created a Backdoor Gun Registry. Lawmakers Want an Explanation.

2 hours ago
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Market Data Newsletter
Saturday, February 14
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Home»News»Media & Culture»The ATF Created a Backdoor Gun Registry. Lawmakers Want an Explanation.
Media & Culture

The ATF Created a Backdoor Gun Registry. Lawmakers Want an Explanation.

News RoomBy News Room2 hours agoNo Comments6 Mins Read178 Views
Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest Copy Link LinkedIn Tumblr Email VKontakte Telegram
The ATF Created a Backdoor Gun Registry. Lawmakers Want an Explanation.
Share
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Email Copy Link

Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

Key Takeaways

Playback Speed

Select a Voice

It has been illegal since 1986 for the federal government to establish a national firearms registry. As you might expect of the sort of people who gravitate to government employment, the bureaucrats at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), enabled by Biden-era policy changes, have taken that as a challenge. Now, members of Congress want answers from the federal gun cops about a vast gun registry database that could threaten the liberty and privacy of firearms owners. They have been stonewalled so far.

You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.’s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.

On February 3, Rep. Michael Cloud (R–Texas) and 26 other members of Congress wrote to the ATF asking about the status of a year-old query that the regulatory agency has ignored. The original 2025 letter inquired about the ATF’s collection of Form 4473 firearms transaction records, which are filled out in the course of every firearms sale by a licensed dealer, from gun vendors that have gone out of business. These records have accumulated and turned into a gun registry in waiting.

“We fear that ATF could have as many as 1.1-billion-gun registration records in its database, if ATF has continued with this historic pace and digitalized an average of 50 million firearm transaction records per year,” the members of Congress reminded the ATF in the recent letter. “This is a violation of the federal prohibition on gun registration at 18 U.S.C. 926(a)(3).”

The source of concern for the 27 members of Congress is not only the de facto registry—though that’s disturbing enough—but that it has seemingly been created in defiance of a specific prohibition. Under the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act, which became law in 1986, “no such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that…any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established.”

However, that law also contained the seeds of mischief by requiring gun dealers to maintain sales records that, if they go out of business, must be surrendered to the government. For decades, dealers could purge older records, surrendering only more recent ones to the ATF if they closed their doors. That changed under the Biden administration.

“In 2022, the ATF finalized a rule requiring FFLs to maintain firearm transaction records indefinitely instead of destroying them after 20 years,” Del Schlangen wrote in 2024 for the University of Wyoming College of Law’s Firearms Research Center. “This move, along with the ATF’s ‘zero-tolerance’ guidance for revoking FFL licenses, has further fueled concerns about the potential for a federal gun registry.”

Schlangen also noted that instead of the masses of paper retained in the past, the ATF was now converting firearm transaction records to electronic format, and “as of 2021, the ATF had digitized over 50 million out-of-business records in that year alone.”

That figure wasn’t advertised by the Biden administration. Instead, the Gun Owners of America (GOA) gained access to internal ATF documents revealing that in 2021, the regulatory agency processed 54.7 million out-of-business records—mostly paper, but some submitted in increasingly common digital format. Those records quickly added up.

In response to a 2021 query from Cloud, who has turned the backdoor gun registry into a crusade, the gun bureaucrats conceded that “ATF manages 920,664,765 OBR [out of business records] as of November 2021. This includes digital and an estimated number of hard copy records that are awaiting image conversion. It is currently estimated that 865,787,086 of those records are in digitalized format.”

A May 2022 report from GOA based on freedom of information requests revealed that the ATF stored these records in searchable PDF and JPEG formats. The agency claims it’s in compliance with the law banning gun registries, though, because the resulting database isn’t searchable by name. But that’s apparently a choice that can be altered at any time.

“It appears the only reason ATF’s registry is not searchable by name is because ATF has merely disabled the ability for its software to search that particular record field,” notes the GOA report. “Of course, something that is so easily disabled could be easily re-enabled.”

Besides, the report adds, “ATF records reveal its gun registry to be searchable by weapon type, make, model, serial number, and caliber, among other functions.”

In fact, proponents of a gun registry used the searchability of the Out of Business Records Imaging System (OBRIS) as a selling point after the attempted assassination of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania. After the would-be assassin was killed, law enforcement agents seized his rifle with hopes of retrieving details based on the serial number.

“They were able to do so in about 30 minutes,” Perry Stein reported for The Washington Post. “The search used sale records from an out-of-business gun store that the government is required to collect—but that Republican lawmakers and the gun lobby would like to place off-limits.”

Well, yes. Advocates of self-defense and of gun ownership in general oppose a gun registry because they fear it could lead to gun confiscation, as politicians including former Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris keep threatening. That’s why they successfully pushed to make a registry illegal. And a searchable database of gun sales that has had the search function for names temporarily disabled is a gun registry waiting to be activated. The fact that it has been built at all shows a bureaucracy champing at the bit to escape restrictions on its power.

As Rep. Cloud commented last week, “the American people have a right to know if their government is maintaining an unlawful registry of firearms and firearm owners in direct violation of U.S. code and the Second Amendment.”

The only saving grace is that if the federal government ever flips the switch on that gun database, it’s going to be a mess. Records that are 10, 20, or 30 years out of date will have been superseded by the passage of time. Gun owners will have moved, divorced and divided their property, died and left their possessions to their heirs, lost guns, or transferred them in private transactions. Or they’ll just claim that their guns are long gone in tragic boating accidents.

But when has the federal government ever done anything especially well? Incompetence has never prevented government officials from taking on big projects like gun registries, and from damaging liberty as they do so.

Read the full article here

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using AI-powered analysis and real-time sources.

Get Your Fact Check Report

Enter your email to receive detailed fact-checking analysis

5 free reports remaining

Continue with Full Access

You've used your 5 free reports. Sign up for unlimited access!

Already have an account? Sign in here

#CivicEngagement #Democracy #NarrativeControl #OpenDebate #PublicDiscourse
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email Telegram Copy Link
News Room
  • Website
  • Facebook
  • X (Twitter)
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn

The FSNN News Room is the voice of our in-house journalists, editors, and researchers. We deliver timely, unbiased reporting at the crossroads of finance, cryptocurrency, and global politics, providing clear, fact-driven analysis free from agendas.

Related Articles

Media & Culture

Libel Suit by “King of Vape” Against N.Y. Post, Over Allegations of Misconduct and Anti-Israel Actions, Thrown Out but May Be Refiled

57 minutes ago
Media & Culture

Kristi Noem’s Response to ICE Killings in Minnesota Exposes Conservatives’ Double Standard on Gun Rights

3 hours ago
Media & Culture

Kenosha County (Wisconsin) DA Sanctioned for AI Hallucinations

4 hours ago
Media & Culture

February 13, 2016

5 hours ago
Media & Culture

The Feds Used Threats To Silence Their ICE-Tracking Speech. Now They’re Fighting Back.

6 hours ago
Debates

How Skyrocketing Prices Kill Homeownership and Threaten Democracy

6 hours ago
Add A Comment
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Editors Picks

ARK Invest Buys $15M Coinbase Shares After Recent Selling

1 hour ago

The ATF Created a Backdoor Gun Registry. Lawmakers Want an Explanation.

2 hours ago

Group of teenage students using smartphones. Credit: Davidovich Mikhail/Alamy Banning social media for the under-16s appears to be contagious. Australia set the trend in December and now other countries are considering doing the same. There is growing momentum in Britain in favour of a ban (with the House of Lords having voted in favour of one last month). Spain is the first European country to propose legislation and Greece is said to be following suit. The Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, has spoken candidly about the abuse he has experienced online, saying it has “crossed many red lines” and nearly caused him to resign in 2024. He’s pushing through laws not only to ban access to major platforms for under-16s, but to hold social media executives criminally responsible if they do not take down illegal or hateful content. The country might even go one step further: Sira Rego, the youth minister, has suggested X should be prohibited altogether, because of the “flagrant violations of fundamental rights” taking place on the platform. She listed various issues, including the sexual deepfake images generated by Grok, and called the broader social media landscape “undemocratic” and controlled by “a few digital strongmen”. Elon Musk, of course, hit back, first posting on X: “Dirty Sánchez is a tyrant and a traitor to the people of Spain”, and an hour and a half later posting “Sánchez is the true fascist totalitarian.” I am not going cheerlead for Musk here. On X specifically, I find the culture now often unpleasant, somewhere I visit out of habit and seldom linger. And while X seems to be a microcosm of the worst trends of social media today, the other major platforms have flaws too. Do read this excellent piece we recently published from Brazilian writer Nina Auras on Meta banning left-wing political accounts in her country. But for those of us who work in defence of freedom of expression, the question is not whether platforms are flawed. The question is whether restricting access to them will strengthen our speech rights or weaken them. At Index, we’re not neuroscientists studying the cognitive effects of scrolling and the impact of social media on the young (as a sidenote a landmark trial has just started in Los Angeles on the mental health effects of Instagram and YouTube, the outcome of which will be very insightful). Rather we’re advocates for people whose speech is curtailed, be it journalists, activists or others. From that vantage point, social media remains incredibly important. For the isolated and the marginalised, it can be a lifeline: a source of learning, solidarity and visibility. The platforms continue to help expose state violence, mobilise protest movements and even unseat autocrats. Our recent magazine issue on Generation Z explored exactly that, and for those of us paying close attention to events in Iran, social media provided some of the best access to on-the-ground information. It is for these reasons that, until recently, the governments most eager to ban social media have typically been the least tolerant of dissent. Yes, the calls from Australia, Spain, Greece, the UK and other countries are rooted in different, more admirable reasons. It’s just bans will still have the same impact. None of the above excuses the abuse, the disinformation, the addictive design of algorithms and democratic interference. Those harms demand attention. But when solutions jump straight to prohibition without reckoning with what might be lost, they begin to resemble moral panics of the past – video games, rock ’n’ roll, the printing press, each once cast as existential threats to society that should be controlled no matter what the cost. READ MORE

2 hours ago

Kristi Noem’s Response to ICE Killings in Minnesota Exposes Conservatives’ Double Standard on Gun Rights

3 hours ago
Latest Posts

Trump Media Files Bitcoin, Ether and Cronos Crypto ETFs with SEC

3 hours ago

Kenosha County (Wisconsin) DA Sanctioned for AI Hallucinations

4 hours ago

Bitcoin ETFs Post $410M Outflows As Early-Week Momentum Fades

4 hours ago

Subscribe to News

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

At FSNN – Free Speech News Network, we deliver unfiltered reporting and in-depth analysis on the stories that matter most. From breaking headlines to global perspectives, our mission is to keep you informed, empowered, and connected.

FSNN.net is owned and operated by GlobalBoost Media
, an independent media organization dedicated to advancing transparency, free expression, and factual journalism across the digital landscape.

Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
Latest News

Libel Suit by “King of Vape” Against N.Y. Post, Over Allegations of Misconduct and Anti-Israel Actions, Thrown Out but May Be Refiled

57 minutes ago

ARK Invest Buys $15M Coinbase Shares After Recent Selling

1 hour ago

The ATF Created a Backdoor Gun Registry. Lawmakers Want an Explanation.

2 hours ago

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

© 2026 GlobalBoost Media. All Rights Reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Our Authors
  • Contact

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

🍪

Cookies

We and our selected partners wish to use cookies to collect information about you for functional purposes and statistical marketing. You may not give us your consent for certain purposes by selecting an option and you can withdraw your consent at any time via the cookie icon.

Cookie Preferences

Manage Cookies

Cookies are small text that can be used by websites to make the user experience more efficient. The law states that we may store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies, we need your permission. This site uses various types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.

Your permission applies to the following domains:

  • https://fsnn.net
Necessary
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Statistic
Statistic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Preferences
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
Marketing
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.