FRB FA-10 Database

[CrackPot]

We have a lot of posts where people talk about the database. Such and such a gun is in my name, how do I get rid of it? Such and such a gun was not FA10'd, can I sell it or do I have to register it first? And so it goes on and on.

• The database is a write only record of transactions
  • When an entry is made, it is there forever. All it does is record a transaction
• MA does NOT have registration
  • instead we have requirements in MGL to record certain transactions when they take place (within 7 days in most cases).
• It is not unlawful to possess a weapon that was never transacted to you in the database
  • I can list no less than 8 ways that you broke no laws yet have a gun that is not transacted to you in the database
• You can never "remove" a gun from your name
  • Guns are not in your name now or ever
  • Transactions occur and you can be the recipient of the weapon in the database
    • All this means is that you possessed the weapon for an instant in time
• There is no data integrity
  • No one or nothing checks that the data makes sense
  • When you transact a gun away, nothing checks if you previously had it transacted to you
  • Nothing is removed or erased
• If you do a records search, you see your history
  • NOT what you currently possess, just the history of everything ever transacted TO you
• LOTS of bad data is in the database
  • paper FA10s were entered and typos occured
  • People have unintentional or intentional mistakes when they do eFA10s
• Recording transactions is almost always the responsibility of the "seller"
  • It is not your concern if the "seller" makes a mistake or does it wrong
  • I say "seller" because if you bring a gun in from out of state you are responsible so that is one exception, there are others but they are edge cases
• Manufacturing guns for yourself
  • The state will tell you to do a FA10 registration within 7 days.
  • I challenge you to find the entry in MGL that makes this a requirement
    • MGL 140 128B speaks about acquisition, not manufacturing
      • But most people believe it applies and behave accordingly

In summary, most people invent a lot of problems that don't exist relative to the database. Transactions are recorded and almost always the responsibility of the seller. That is it. Other than following the law for transactions, like the Approved Firearms Roster, stop worrying about it.

 

[AHM]

• Recording transactions is almost always the responsibility of the "seller"
  • It is not your concern if the "seller" makes a mistake or does it wrong
  • I say "seller" because if you bring a gun in from out of state you are responsible so that is the exception

You should edit the base note to add an exception bullet for inheritance.

Are there yet other exceptions?

 

[CrackPot]

You should edit the base note to add an exception bullet for inheritance.

Are there yet other exceptions?

I was not trying to be exhaustive on exceptions like I was not prepared to list the 8+ ways I know of for you to have a gun that the state is unaware of yet you have broken no laws. That is an interesting exercise left up to the reader. I will make the addition on inheritance, but I was not trying to come up with every edge case; mostly I wanted to get people to chill out about the data base and stop acting like it meant something.

 

[40 Creedmoor fan]

This is a well-organized post. I wish I had something like that to read when I first started: I would have avoided a lot of headaches.

 

[AHM]

I was not trying to be exhaustive on exceptions like I was not prepared to list the 8+ ways I know of for you to have a gun that the state is unaware of yet you have broken no laws. That is an interesting exercise left up to the reader. I will make the addition on inheritance, but I was not trying to come up with every edge case; mostly I wanted to get people to chill out about the data base and stop acting like it meant something.

I'm sure that fully characterizing the database's pragmatics to gun owners
would be a process not an event. Maybe never-ending.

But the base note seems like such a good start,
you provide more of a service to your core audience
(the more timid elements amongst gun owners)
by continuously improving the base note as improvements are suggested,
than dooming them to reading a litany of tweaks.

I wouldn't have thought of this method of improvement
if it wasn't for the fact that I think that's how @Len-2A Training
strove to maintain the big pile of Mass Gun Law stickies
when he had the time and energy to polish the threads.

 

[Len-2A Training]

I'm sure that fully characterizing the database's pragmatics to gun owners
would be a process not an event. Maybe never-ending.

But the base note seems like such a good start,
you provide more of a service to your core audience
(the more timid elements amongst gun owners)
by continuously improving the base note as improvements are suggested,
than dooming them to reading a litany of tweaks.

I wouldn't have thought of this method of improvement
if it wasn't for the fact that I think that's how @Len-2A Training
strove to maintain the big pile of Mass Gun Law stickies
when he had the time and energy to polish the threads.

Worth noting: I reverted to posting stickies in my own sub-forum and locking them, as those in the Mass Gun Law sub-forum became out of control with mundane responses that folks had to wade thru to find valid info. So those interested can look at the Training/2A-Training sub-forum to find later info on Mass gun laws.

 

[Shevchenko]

When the local cops came to collect my firearms after a(n absurd) suspension I saw the wild ineptitude of their alleged system . The cop had a list of "my guns" and it was about 15 pistols/rifles I've sold, traded in, "lawfully disposed of" etc. As a SysSec engineer tho, I'm most offended by the fact it's ever been referred to as a database system.

 

[AHM]

Worth noting: I reverted to posting stickies in my own sub-forum and locking them, as those in the Mass Gun Law sub-forum became out of control with mundane responses that folks had to wade thru to find valid info. So those interested can look at the Training/2A-Training sub-forum to find later info on Mass gun laws.

1. Sorry to mischaracterize.
2. LTFY.

 

[Gerryc18]

Hey I was just hoping someone could help me
Out with this . So everywhere I read it says you are limited to 4 fa-10 transfers as seller per calendar year … I just counted and I’m at 7 does anyone know if that’s a problem? Thanks

 

[Marty McFly]

Hey I was just hoping someone could help me
Out with this . So everywhere I read it says you are limited to 4 fa-10 transfers as seller per calendar year … I just counted and I’m at 7 does anyone know if that’s a problem? Thanks

Good luck in jail

 

[Len-2A Training]

Hey I was just hoping someone could help me
Out with this . So everywhere I read it says you are limited to 4 fa-10 transfers as seller per calendar year … I just counted and I’m at 7 does anyone know if that’s a problem? Thanks

Not sure if you are joking or not. MGL calls out 4/calendar year. More than that and you are violating the law.

Whether or not it will be picked up is questionable. You might get a letter or a visit if they notify the local PD (but unlikely).

 

[Gerryc18]

Good luck in jail

Seriously

 

[Gerryc18]

Not sure if you are joking or not. MGL calls out 4/calendar year. More than that and you are violating the law.

Whether or not it will be picked up is questionable. You might get a letter or a visit if they notify the local PD (but unlikely).

Thanks I’m not going to do anymore and just hope nothing bad happens I didn’t purposely break the law just lost track . I know that sounds ridiculous but it’s the truth

 

[JoseyWales]

• • Guns are not in your name now or ever

Thanks for typing this whole thing up.

Is this a typo? I thought a name is tied to the transaction?

 

[Gerryc18]

We have a lot of posts where people talk about the database. Such and such a gun is in my name, how do I get rid of it? Such and such a gun was not FA10'd, can I sell it or do I have to register it first? And so it goes on and on.

• The database is a write only record of transactions
  • When an entry is made, it is there forever. All it does is record a transaction
• MA does NOT have registration
  • instead we have requirements in MGL to record certain transactions when they take place (within 7 days in most cases).
• It is not unlawful to possess a weapon that was never transacted to you in the database
  • I can list no less than 8 ways that you broke no laws yet have a gun that is not transacted to you in the database
• You can never "remove" a gun from your name
  • Guns are not in your name now or ever
  • Transactions occur and you can be the recipient of the weapon in the database
    • All this means is that you possessed the weapon for an instant in time
• There is no data integrity
  • No one or nothing checks that the data makes sense
  • When you transact a gun away, nothing checks if you previously had it transacted to you
  • Nothing is removed or erased
• If you do a records search, you see your history
  • NOT what you currently possess, just the history of everything ever transacted TO you
• LOTS of bad data is in the database
  • paper FA10s were entered and typos occured
  • People have unintentional or intentional mistakes when they do eFA10s
• Recording transactions is almost always the responsibility of the "seller"
  • It is not your concern if the "seller" makes a mistake or does it wrong
  • I say "seller" because if you bring a gun in from out of state you are responsible so that is one exception, there are others but they are edge cases
• Manufacturing guns for yourself
  • The state will tell you to do a FA10 registration within 7 days.
  • I challenge you to find the entry in MGL that makes this a requirement
    • MGL 140 128Bspeaks about acquisition, not manufacturing
      • But most people believe it applies and behave accordingly

In summary, most people invent a lot of problems that don't exist relative to the database. Transactions are recorded and almost always the responsibility of the seller. That is it. Other than following the law for transactions, like the Approved Firearms Roster, stop worrying about it.

How about the 4 transfers rule ?

 

[CATI]

When the local cops came to collect my firearms after a(n absurd) suspension I saw the wild ineptitude of their alleged system . The cop had a list of "my guns" and it was about 15 pistols/rifles I've sold, traded in, "lawfully disposed of" etc. As a SysSec engineer tho, I'm most offended by the fact it's ever been referred to as a database system.

What did the list look like ?
Was it just something like Date Serial firearm name caliber?

 

[Len-2A Training]

Thanks I’m not going to do anymore and just hope nothing bad happens I didn’t purposely break the law just lost track . I know that sounds ridiculous but it’s the truth

If you keep a copy of the FA-10s, it is easier to keep track and not run afoul of the law.

 

[milktree]

Thanks for typing this whole thing up.

Is this a typo? I thought a name is tied to the transaction?

The fact that you had a gun at an instant in time does not mean you have it now.

E.g.: You buy a gun at a dealer, they report the transaction. Then you sell me the gun. There’s a record of my receiving it. I sell the gun to Tammy. Now there’s a record of Tammy receiving it. Tammy sells it to Rita, but the e-FA10 system breaks and the transaction doesn’t get recorded.

There’s now “records” of three people having the gun (you, me, & Tammy), but none of us have the gun, and no laws have been broken.

 

[JoseyWales]

The fact that you had a gun at an instant in time does not mean you have it now.

E.g.: You buy a gun at a dealer, they report the transaction. Then you sell me the gun. There’s a record of my receiving it. I sell the gun to Tammy. Now there’s a record of Tammy receiving it. Tammy sells it to Rita, but the e-FA10 system breaks and the transaction doesn’t get recorded.

There’s now “records” of three people having the gun (you, me, & Tammy), but none of us have the gun, and no laws have been broken.

Since there's a date associated with the transaction then they know who has it last - de facto registration.

(It's probably rare enough when the FA10 system breaks)

 

[milktree]

Since there's a date associated with the transaction then they know who has it last - de facto registration.

(It's probably rare enough when the FA10 system breaks)

“De-facto” is not the same as actual.

If the “database” doesn’t match up with reality, that’s OK.

There’s is no law that says the two have to match, and if (when) they don’t, there’s nothing they can charge you with — except maybe failing to report the transaction. Maybe.

 

[Gator9329]

How would they prove you didn't report the transaction?
What's the charge and penalty on that?
Is it a charge for every item that is wrong in their database?

 

[CrackPot]

How would they prove you didn't report the transaction?
What's the charge and penalty on that?
Is it a charge for every item that is wrong in their database?

Its essentially unprovable w/o a camera crew on you 24x7. If the gun is not in state and assembled for seven consecutive days how do you prove acquisition? For disposition, if you sell to an out of state FFL or are a resident of another state and do a face to face or disassemble and offload the pieces or...

$500-$1000 find for first offense, up to 10years in the slammer for second.

At some point people will stop worrying about the damn database...

 

[milktree]

How would they prove you didn't report the transaction?

They would assert that because it's not in the database that therefore you didn't report it.

This is false, of course, because they'd have to prove that it was your responsibility to report it first, which is tricky.

And they'd have to prove that you failed to report it less than six years previously, because there's a statute of limitations.

Is it a charge for every item that is wrong in their database?

Sure! Why not? Every other crime works that way.

 

[milktree]

$500-$1000 find for first offense, up to 10years in the slammer for second.

Where is that in the law? I couldn't find the "penalty" section for C. 140 § 120A

EDIT:

C. 140 § 128 says "$1,000 - $10,000 and/or 1 - 10 years in prison" with no distinction between first and subsequent offenses.

 

[OnTheRoad]

Don't fear the dark cloud of the FA-10 hanging over you. Its flaws are easy to show, and as an evidentiary tool it is absolutely useless. Any competent lawyer should be able to get FA-10 based evidence suppressed before second call.

And yes, it is a lame attempt at registration and it is commonly used by the authorities to try to get an idea of how many / what kind of guns you possess.

 

[CrackPot]

Where is that in the law? I couldn't find the "penalty" section for C. 140 § 120A

EDIT:

C. 140 § 128 says "$1,000 - $10,000 and/or 1 - 10 years in prison" with no distinction between first and subsequent offenses.

MGL 140 128B

"Whoever violates any provision of this section shall for the first offense be punished by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $1,000 and for any subsequent offense by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than ten years"

This is the law that covers obtaining a weapon

You quoted the language for the penalty for a dealer who violates key terms of a dealers license

 

[Shevchenko]

What did the list look like ?
Was it just something like Date Serial firearm name caliber?

I don't remember exactly what the list they brought looked like, but this is how they inventory everything. had to sign off on each of these pages (about 30) when I went to the station wiht my uncle to transfer possession to him. I think they just eyeball and guess ammo count lol, these numbers can't be right.

 

[Biggles77]

Sorry for bumping this older thread - and I assume there are similar threads kicking around NES. But this one caught my eye.

Many have a flippant attitude about the EFA-10's and the necessity of them. (Don't get me wrong I'm not criticizing in a negative way - I wish I was that brave).

One thing that I heard from an LEO (MA Trooper) in the past was that if you get pulled over any LEO can simply pull up your file and know every single firearm that you've ever owned. I was shocked to hear it at the time and I'm curious any other LEO's can confirm that?

 

[drgrant]

Sorry for bumping this older thread - and I assume there are similar threads kicking around NES. But this one caught my eye.

Many have a flippant attitude about the EFA-10's and the necessity of them. (Don't get me wrong I'm not criticizing in a negative way - I wish I was that brave).

One thing that I heard from an LEO (MA Trooper) in the past was that if you get pulled over any LEO can simply pull up your file and know every single firearm that you've ever owned. I was shocked to hear it at the time and I'm curious any other LEO's can confirm that?

I have had it done to me on the side of the road. It still doesn't mean anything. The young kid that pulled me over i think just about shit his pants he was like "why do you have so many guns" i responded that i wish i still had all of those... (nothing disappears from that thing) there are probably many on this board that have hundreds of entries in there.

 

[Biggles77]

I have had it done to me on the side of the road. It still doesn't mean anything. The young kid that pulled me over i think just about shit his pants he was like "why do you have so many guns" i responded that i wish i still had all of those... (nothing disappears from that thing) there are probably many on this board that have hundreds of entries in there.

Still disturbing to me. No matter how much I hear people try to convince me that we "don't really have a gun registry", it is, in my opinion, a gun registry just under another name. If an LEO/the State can simply pull up your info and know what you own, they can also knock on your door to confiscate them (in theory).