Ghost guns and gun tracing?

Let's face it -- they were able to track ONE cow with mad cow disease from somewhere in Canada to a specific barn somewhere in the United States. We often use this as a counterpoint to the argument that they (i.e. the government) can't find all the illegal aliens in the country, but it can as easily be applied to the issue of tracing guns. As 44 AMP has said, it's much easier to follow a pre-constructed paper trail. Doing it the other way requires w-o-r-k. They say they "can't" do it because they just don't want to do the necessary work. It's much easier (for the government) to just overburden the entire innocent population with an ever-expanding pile of regulations.
 
Im just not seeing it, how can they trace a ghost gun? Lets say a ghost gun turns up at a crime scene, how can they trace it back to the owner or builder?
 
Lets say a ghost gun turns up at a crime scene, how can they trace it back to the owner or builder?
Click to expand...

The same way they trace anything that doesn't have a serial number. They TALK to people. Lots of people, and they will find someone who knows something, which leads them to someone else, one bit at time until they have enough information to figure out the big picture.

They know where they found the gun. Who they took it from, who that person's family is, who their "known associates" are. They work their street sources. Somebody knows where he got the gun, or where you can get one like it, and they follow up leads until they have a suspect(s), and then investigate them.

just like they do on TV except they can't do it in 45 minutes of an hour tv show...

Not an easy job, but one they can do, if they choose to...

Though it is a lot easier to just cry "we can't do it unless you pass more laws" , its not honest to say that.
 
44 AMP said:
The same way they trace anything that doesn't have a serial number. They TALK to people. Lots of people, and they will find someone who knows something, which leads them to someone else, one bit at time until they have enough information to figure out the big picture.

They know where they found the gun. Who they took it from, who that person's family is, who their "known associates" are. They work their street sources. Somebody knows where he got the gun, or where you can get one like it, and they follow up leads until they have a suspect(s), and then investigate them.

just like they do on TV except they can't do it in 45 minutes of an hour tv show...

Not an easy job, but one they can do, if they choose to...

Though it is a lot easier to just cry "we can't do it unless you pass more laws" , its not honest to say that.
Click to expand...

Where who got the gun?

Following leads and contacts is not tracing the gun. Sans any other evidence, a serialized gun they can trace back at least to someone, thats tracing the gun.
 
Koda94 said:
Following leads and contacts is not tracing the gun. Sans any other evidence, a serialized gun they can trace back at least to someone, thats tracing the gun.
Click to expand...
So they pick up a S&W 5906 at the scene of a drive-by shooting. It has a serial number. They call S&W. The serial number was sold to Davidsons. They call Davidson's. That serial number was sold to Ken's Sporting Goods on March 17, 1993. A BATFE agent shows up at Ken's Sporting Goods and asks to see the 4473s from 1993. They find the gun in the file -- it was sold on June 23, 1994 to Fred Smith.

Fred Smith died in 2007. His son lives at that address. His son doesn't know anything about the gun -- he says his father's house was burgled in 2003 and a number of guns were taken. There was a police report filed but his father didn't remember the serial number so there's no stolen gun report anywhere with that specific serial number assigned to it.

It's now 2021. The gun has been missing and unaccounted for since 2003 -- 18 years. The paper trail is useless, so now the only way to trace the gun is to try for fingerprints and/or DNA, or to talk to witnesses, get suspects and talk to people who know the suspects, and see if anyone remembers seeing Big Daddy Kool showing off a S&W 5906.
 
Aguila Blanca said:
So they pick up a S&W 5906 at the scene of a drive-by shooting. It has a serial number. They call S&W. The serial number was sold to Davidsons. They call Davidson's. That serial number was sold to Ken's Sporting Goods on March 17, 1993. A BATFE agent shows up at Ken's Sporting Goods and asks to see the 4473s from 1993. They find the gun in the file -- it was sold on June 23, 1994 to Fred Smith.

Fred Smith died in 2007. His son lives at that address. His son doesn't know anything about the gun -- he says his father's house was burgled in 2003 and a number of guns were taken. There was a police report filed but his father didn't remember the serial number so there's no stolen gun report anywhere with that specific serial number assigned to it.

It's now 2021. The gun has been missing and unaccounted for since 2003 -- 18 years. The paper trail is useless, so now the only way to trace the gun is to try for fingerprints and/or DNA, or to talk to witnesses, get suspects and talk to people who know the suspects, and see if anyone remembers seeing Big Daddy Kool showing off a S&W 5906.
Click to expand...

Thats my point, serialized guns are traceable (useful or not) but ghost guns are not at all traceable. Suspects, fingerprints or DNA... are not tracing the gun those are totally different leads.
 
Koda94 said:
Thats my point, serialized guns are traceable (useful or not) but ghost guns are not at all traceable.
Click to expand...
If the trail ends 18 years ago, I would not consider that to be tracing the gun. At the conclusion of the "trace," they don't have any idea where the gun went, who used it in the shooting, or how/where/when the shooter obtained it. How is that a trace?

Suspects, fingerprints or DNA... are not tracing the gun those are totally different leads.
Click to expand...
If that line of inquiry ends up connecting a suspect with the gun used in the shooting, as far as I'm concerned they traced it.

We're arguing semantics.
 
I don't know if I agree its just a semantic thing. If a suspect leaves fingerprints at the scene and they ID the person from the prints that has nothing to do with the murder weapon found, even if the prints were also on the gun... they didn't need to trace the gun to the murderer to solve that one.



A serial number trace that doesn't pan out is still a trace. The whole original point of registration is so they can trace the gun to the criminal. The whole point of a ghost gun is so it cant be traced to an owner for confiscation from prohibition laws, there's a difference here by design intent.
 
The whole original point of registration is so they can trace the gun to the criminal.
Click to expand...

No, the point is so they can trace the gun to its last registered owner. To see if that person is someone who is part of their investigation, or should be...

Now if that trail stops a couple decades ago, because the last registered purchaser died, or the gun was stolen, or the owner sold it or gave it away without filing any Fed or state paperwork, which was the case in most of the country for the past 200 years+, then the trace (paper trail)is of little use connecting the gun they have today with a suspect they have, today.

just FYI, but are you aware that, by law, criminals are NOT required to register guns they possess? It violates their rights.
 
I considered an 80% build but I figured with a possible 50% screw up rate, I'd be better off buying 100% lowers.

It'll be interesting to see if they manage to make uppers require a serial number too. I should have bought an extra upper when I had the money and they were cheap...

Tony
 
I'm not sure this fits in the law and civil rights section. Also, if you order something on a computer, it can be tracked pretty easily.
 
There is no way to pair up a gun that has passed though multiple hands, even if every one of them was an FFL.

You would have to require EVERY FFL in the NATION to look for a serial number in there "bound books."

Clearly excessive.
Such a warrant would never make it through a judge unless he is truly stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top