Oh *that* illegal database

Everything you need to know about this story is summed up in the comment by a reader calling themselves "likeibelievethat"

You know, State Police Superintendent MacLeish is not a very good liar.

"The electronic records never posed a threat, MacLeish said. 'The info was in an electronic file that no one did anything with,' MacLeish said."

And yet...

"An employee in the state police Firearms Transaction Approval Program noticed Vansickle's age and gender, and brought the sale to an immediate halt... MacLeish said the initial call taker 'was concerned this individual never purchased a weapon before.'"

So nobody knew about this file and nobody did anything with it... yet this clerk not only knew about it,. but knew how to access it so swiftly and automatically that he was able to bring a sale to an "immediate halt."

Superintendent, please be on the lookout for your pants, which are on fire.

Liberals don't mind this sort of thing. It falls under the "reasonable" part of those restrictions they're always calling for. Let me be the first to call utter bullshit on a "technical glitch" which resulted in the formation of a database that goes back at least seven years and probably much further. Given that I install databases and their attendant infrastructure for a living I can tell you that if a mere "glitch" could create databases, I would need a new line of work.

Databases are a pain in the ass to create and maintain which is why it takes significant time, effort and yes, money to do so. Even smaller ones become fragile over time. Seven years worth of data on gun ownership for an entire state? Created by a "glitch"? Bull. Fucking. Shit.

Thomas MacLeish is either a liar or woefully ignorant of technologies used by his department. Either one is grounds for immediate dismissal and prosecution.

Don't worry about it. You don't own a gun so what's the harm.

Comments

Mike W. said…
bull fucking shit is right. It gives me such a warm fuzzy feeling to know that the DSP has immediately avaliable records of all of my firearms purchases.

What also really bothers me about this story is that the DSP arbitrarily denied this woman's purchase based on discriminatory and extralegal criteria.

Prohibitive criteria for purchasing a gun are very specific. If not prohibited under such criteria you get your gun immediately and the DSP has NO legal authority to deny or delay the transfer.

Sadly I doubt anyone will be punished or fired for any of this.
1:49 PM
a most peculiar nature said…
This story got some play on some national conservative and libertarian blogs.

I find the DSP's responses absolutely frightening. Duffy is right: databases are powerful and fragile things. All sorts of mischief can occur.

There should be more of an outrage.
5:10 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

For Gerard

 Many moons ago, I started reading blogs and shortly thereafter I started reading them.  I became discouraged because I read many writers, far more talented than me and the ease with which they elucidated the very points I wanted to make but so much more elegantly and completely that I just gave up.    Gerard of American Digest was one such writer.  His facility with prose and his ability to evoke emotion was remarkable.  I linked to him once with my nascent blog and he was kind enough to reach out to me and thank me for the link.  I literally had zero readers.  Just like now.  But that was the measure of the man.  He took the time to reach out to me and genuinely thank me for the link.   The closest I ever had to meeting the man was meeting Morgan in person.  Morgan and Gerard were friends.  They had an evident mutual respect for their respective works.   I never met Gerard, didn't know the man personally but having read his work I had a sense of the man.  He's dying now.  If
Read more

So....the autism thing

Since April is nearly over and it's autism awareness month, I suppose I should talk a bit about it. I guess the best way to start is to rehash the story of How I Got Here. My oldest was born in 1999. Healthy, happy and so on. One peculiar thing he did as an infant was to avoid eye contact. Our doctor assured us it was because he was so young and his eyesight was undeveloped and he was probably focusing on something in the background that was more interesting. Besides, babies don't recognize faces for a few months after birth. Only later did we find out that our doctor was an idiot. He was 16 mos. old when his little brother was born and he was walking and making wishes known by pulling me or my wife by the hand to whatever he wanted etc. He was fascinated with the wheels on toys. If you gave him a truck he'd turn it over and spin the wheels and smile. Only later would I find out this is a major warning sign. This was our first born and what the hell did I know?
Read more