• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      223 days ago

      I should say, I’m fine with it if they actually do it, rather than being one of the largest contributers to it.

      Still though even if they don’t, I don’t have jurisdiction in, well, anywhere, so again I ask what the fuck I plan to do about it if they did release such a privacy invading “rob me” list like California does? Say “hey mister are you selling these legally or not?” Great. What next? I’m not going to assault the dude’s house and steal his guns at gunpoint myself, if the agencies tasked with doing something about it don’t, why even keep a list? Why even report multiple sales if the only people who can do anything don’t?

      • Flying SquidM
        link
        English
        223 days ago

        In theory, state or even local law enforcement could do something about it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          223 days ago

          Sure they could, without that information being public. Public means you or I, who are not authorities that could do anything about anything, could look up a list. The authorities, be they federal, state, or local law enforcement, I am more comfortable with them having a list than you or me, yes.

          Although tbh I’m not actually sure the state or local PD could do anything, if it is federal’s jurisdiction because of trafficking across state/country lines (which is a thing). It’s entirely possible they’d have to go through the FBI. Still though let’s assume they could do something about it, why then would you and me need the list?