Oklahoma - Gun owners got letters, 2/3 complied

[MiddleAgedKen]

I just think the police in Oklahome use a weird way to spend manpower and resources to solve a crime.

Whether or not it was intended so by the police, it was a test...with a 2/3 failure rate.

[mekender]

Look at all the compliant sheeple. These are lawful gun owners.

these are probably about similar numbers as to who would turn in their guns in a ban.

[stradawhovious]

these are probably about similar numbers as to who would turn in their guns in a ban.

Guns? What guns? I don't have any guns.......

[deathrider1579]

You just gotta' love these lines:

The other 15 or so gun owners who did not show up will be checked by the OSBI to see why they didn't volunteer for the test firings.

"They can have any number of reasons" for not volunteering, Brown said. "They could be against it, they could be anti-government, or they eventually may want to help."

That is probably one of the scariest things I've read in a long, long time! "you better volunteer to give up your rights, or we will take them away" WTF!
Makes blood shoot out of my eyes.
You know they are gonna go to a judge on anyone who tells the to leave and not come back. With the old "if they didn't have something to hide they wouldn't care if we checked their guns" routine.
Once again happy I live in Texas

-DR

[blackeagle603]

So what can gun rights org's do in response? Is there a suit in this against that dept if those with standing care to pursue it?

[308Mike]

I just think the police in Oklahome use a weird way to spend manpower and resources to solve a crime.

Whether or not it was intended so by the police, it was a test...with a 2/3 failure rate.

Actually, they got a 2/3 compliance rate (40 complied out of 60 letters sent), a 1/3 failure rate - but this is only for those THEY KNOW ABOUT. Private sales are an unknown number, as are people moving in from out of state.

And I'll bet they're going to be surprised when they STILL come up empty!

[Erik]

I think MiddleAgedKen ment that it was a 2/3 failure rate for the gunowners, not the police...

And I dont see how anyone can take legal action against the police in this case so far. They are only asking people to volonteer information (as in testing their guns), they aren't formally forcing them. And I cant see any law stopping them from calling up the last 1/3 and ask them why they didn't show up. The police can *ask* anything they want, that doesn't mean people have to answer.

However, the police will probably tell the people they contact that it's better for them to volonteer, or they will wonder why they wont, and suddenly make you a person of interest, and start calling around your neighbor and work, to see if they have any information...
IANAL, but I think that is a totally legal way to go about it, to make people let them test their guns just to get it over with.

And I sincerely doubt that the gun in question is among those 60...

[mekender]

I think MiddleAgedKen ment that it was a 2/3 failure rate for the gunowners, not the police...

And I dont see how anyone can take legal action against the police in this case so far. They are only asking people to volonteer information (as in testing their guns), they aren't formally forcing them. And I cant see any law stopping them from calling up the last 1/3 and ask them why they didn't show up. The police can *ask* anything they want, that doesn't mean people have to answer.

However, the police will probably tell the people they contact that it's better for them to volonteer, or they will wonder why they wont, and suddenly make you a person of interest, and start calling around your neighbor and work, to see if they have any information...
IANAL, but I think that is a totally legal way to go about it, to make people let them test their guns just to get it over with.

And I sincerely doubt that the gun in question is among those 60...

but is it legal for police go through the 4473's without a warrant?

[Erik]

but is it legal for police go through the 4473's without a warrant?

Again, IANAL, but:

Harris said the 4473 forms stay with the gun dealers and are not submitted to any government agency. They are, however, available to law enforcement.

So as far as I can see, nothing is stopping police to go through the forms, and make a list of every possible owner, and then call the owner and *ask* them to volunteer to test their gun. They trick is how they ask that question, the owners will very likely interpret it as a demand, and agree. As long as the owners volunteer, it's legal.

It's different here.
The police has the records, and they can show up at anytime to check how all wapons are stored, and that they are all present. If you do not let them in they have the right to go in anyway (no warrant needed) and if the guns are not locked up properly, or if one is missing (for instance loaned to a friend without a written loan agreement present) they can revoke all your licenses on the spot, and take all your guns.

[mekender]

but is it legal for police go through the 4473's without a warrant?

Again, IANAL, but:

Harris said the 4473 forms stay with the gun dealers and are not submitted to any government agency. They are, however, available to law enforcement.

So as far as I can see, nothing is stopping police to go through the forms, and make a list of every possible owner, and then call the owner and *ask* them to volunteer to test their gun. They trick is how they ask that question, the owners will very likely interpret it as a demand, and agree. As long as the owners volunteer, it's legal.

but what i am getting at is, are those forms treated as private information just like forms would be at many other places?

are these pawn shops now liable for releasing private information without the consent of the person on the form?

or can a cop just simply walk in a shop and ask to see records without any questions asked?

i know that the ATF can do that, but can local LEO's?