Did the FBI have a database to check rifle ownership?

[Gerry Down]

Just wondering if the FBI had any type of database or relationship with the NRA whereby if they had a file on someone, such as LHO, they could check to see if they owned a rifle and thereby be someone to be put on the security index for the Secret Service in times with the President would be in the locality of that person?

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Gerry Down said:

Just wondering if the FBI had any type of database or relationship with the NRA whereby if they had a file on someone, such as LHO, they could check to see if they owned a rifle and thereby be someone to be put on the security index for the Secret Service in times with the President would be in the locality of that person?

They still don't. Second Amendment fanatics (led by the NRA) have prevented the Federal Govt. from tracking gun ownership in the U.S. That is why and how mentally deranged teenagers are able to acquire AR-15s. 

Although some states have required background checks--to try to prevent criminals and nuts from getting guns--this is easily avoided by driving over to a neighboring state and going to a gun show--where one can buy most any gun like one can buy a t-shirt at a swap meet. In 1963, moreover, you could buy most any gun through the mail. As I recall, the post office, in the unlikely name of Holmes, knew Oswald had purchased weapons, but failed to share this info with the FBI or SS because the regulations in place prevented him from doing so. IOW, there was no Fed database of gun ownership. 

And I'm pretty sure there isn't one today. The Center for Disease Control was at one time studying who owns guns, how many they own, and how many of them end up being used on humans. And they were ordered by NRA-funded members of congress to stop doing so, under the belief it doesn't matter how many innocent children get murdered by guns stolen or sold off from the estate of a gun-hoarder, since it is the divine right of gun-hoarders to have as many weapons as they want. It's insane. The U.S. has something like 5% of the world's population but 50% of its guns. 

On the good side, though, it gives us something to trade for our drugs. 

Edited April 9, 2023 by Pat Speer

[Mark Knight]

In a word: NO.

In the US in 1963, gun sales weren't tracked. Guns are not registered, so there is no federal database. The National Rifle Association, prior to becoming primarily a political lobbying organization, was simply a voluntary organization of people with an interest in rifles, hunting, and shooting sports. Membership in no way indicated that a person actually OWNED a rifle, as there is/was no ownership requirement to join. And since, to the best of our knowledge, Oswald wasn't an NRA member, his name wouldn't have been on the NRA's membership rolls, which was their "database" in 1963.

Nor did the NRA, or anyone else, track the purchases and sales of any sort of firearms in the US. Prior to 1968, there was no requirement to show any form of ID to purchase a firearm in the US. Many sales of used guns occurred between individuals, often with no names being exchanged. So it was impossible to know which households in the US did or did not own firearms, or what firearms they possessed.

And with the state of computerization in 1963 [like ZERO], had there been such a database, going through all of those PAPER records would have been so cumbersome as to have been completely ineffective.

[Gerry Down]

3 hours ago, Mark Knight said:

Prior to 1968, there was no requirement to show any form of ID to purchase a firearm in the US. Many sales of used guns occurred between individuals, often with no names being exchanged.

I'm surprised to hear this. I had assumed LHO purchased the rifle through the mail because he did not want to show his own personal ID (cos he had been a defector), or his faked Hidell ID, at a gunshop who might then call the cops on him. And that this is why he then decided to order it through the mail.

Surely a gunshop would ask for ID in 1963 if you wanted to buy a rifle, even if it was to make sure you were old enough to have a rifle?

[Mark Knight]

1 hour ago, Gerry Down said:

I'm surprised to hear this. I had assumed LHO purchased the rifle through the mail because he did not want to show his own personal ID (cos he had been a defector), or his faked Hidell ID, at a gunshop who might then call the cops on him. And that this is why he then decided to order it through the mail.

Surely a gunshop would ask for ID in 1963 if you wanted to buy a rifle, even if it was to make sure you were old enough to have a rifle?

There was no requirement. Individual stores may have had their own policies, but in my part of the US, there never was an age requirement possess a firearm. Hunting rifles were routinely given to 10-, 11-, and 12-year-olds as birthday gifts. BB guns ["air rifles"] were given to 7- and 8-year-olds. My sister bought a new single-shot .22 caliber rifle when she was 12, and as a 12-year-old she had no ID to show the store. [Student IDs came along years later.]

[Norman T. Field]

2 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

Surely a gunshop would ask for ID in 1963 if you wanted to buy a rifle, even if it was to make sure you were old enough to have a rifle?

In most cases, not at all. 

[Gerry Down]

59 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

Individual stores may have had their own policies, 

Consider the Irving sports shop incident. For that repair Oswald apparently gave his name for the repair. 

This makes me think LHO might have gone to some gun store to buy a rifle, found out ID was required, and then decided to buy through the mail in case the shop would inform the FBI that he was trying to buy a rifle. And LHO was doing his best in this timeframe to avoid the FBI.

LHO might have had some experience at a gunstore requiring ID, whatever that experience was, that then caused him to order it through the mail. Because he almost certainly got the ammunition through a gun store, which means he was at a gunstore, but did not want to buy the rifle itself from there for some reason.

Is it possible LHO wanted a rifle capable of taking a military round because he knew he would be shooting Walker through a pane of glass and so needed a military round for stability going through glass, and whatever store he went to did not supply military rifles? That would seem unusual, if they supplied military rounds such as ce399, then one would imagine they'd supply military rifles. Unless they had to order the military rounds specifically for LHO upon his request at the gun store.

[Pat Speer]

38 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

Consider the Irving sports shop incident. For that repair Oswald apparently gave his name for the repair. 

This makes me think LHO might have gone to some gun store to buy a rifle, found out ID was required, and then decided to buy through the mail in case the shop would inform the FBI that he was trying to buy a rifle. And LHO was doing his best in this timeframe to avoid the FBI.

LHO might have had some experience at a gunstore requiring ID, whatever that experience was, that then caused him to order it through the mail. Because he almost certainly got the ammunition through a gun store, which means he was at a gunstore, but did not want to buy the rifle itself from there for some reason.

Is it possible LHO wanted a rifle capable of taking a military round because he knew he would be shooting Walker through a pane of glass and so needed a military round for stability going through glass, and whatever store he went to did not supply military rifles? That would seem unusual, if they supplied military rounds such as ce399, then one would imagine they'd supply military rifles. Unless they had to order the military rounds specifically for LHO upon his request at the gun store.

My understanding is that WWII military surplus rifles were dirt cheap in comparison to new hunting rifles, and that that was why Oswald (and people of Oswald's economic background)_ bought them. 

[Benjamin Cole]

Yes, LHO could have bought a gun in any gun shop in Texas with cash, no tracing at all. Sheesh, he could have worn sunglasses and a baseball cap, a throwaway shirt from Goodwill and a blond wig.  LHO must have known all this. 

Some suspect LHO was deliberately creating a paper trail, and others contend the trail was totally fabricated. 

It may be LHO was following instructions and ordering weapons under a pseudonym. He was promised the authorities would protect the pseudonym, if needed. That is, there would be a post-Big Event manhunt for Alek Hidell, which might conclude with a body being found. 

Just IMHO....

[Gerry Down]

17 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Yes, LHO could have bought a gun in any gun shop in Texas with cash, no tracing at all.

We always hear that. But as far as I know that contention has never actually been proved.

For all we know, gun stores in the Dallas area in 1963 could have been requiring ID if even such a request was done by gun store owners simply to deter criminals from purchasing guns. The fact that a criminal would have to show their name on an ID card would make them that bit more uncomfortable in then using that gun in a crime as the gun store owner might remember their name and/or face for any subsequent DPD investigation. 

LHO was somewhat of a minor celebrity for having defected to Russia which might make Oswald uncomfortable in showing his ID to a gun store owner in case the name "Oswald" triggered the gun store owners memory that this was the guy who defected to Russia some years back and then came back to the U.S. as had been reported in the newspapers. The gun store owner could then tip off the FBI which would create a headache for Oswald as he was trying to dodge the FBI in this timeframe. 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 minute ago, Gerry Down said:

We always hear that. But as far as I know that contention has never actually been proved.

For all we know, gun stores in the Dallas area in 1963 could have been requiring ID if even such a request was done by gun store owners simply to deter criminals from purchasing guns. The fact that a criminal would have to show their name on an ID card would make them that bit more uncomfortable in then using that gun in a crime as the gun store owner might remember their name and/or face for any subsequent DPD investigation. 

LHO was somewhat of a minor celebrity for having defected to Russia which might make Oswald uncomfortable in showing his ID to a gun store owner in case the name "Oswald" triggered the gun store owners memory that this was the guy who defected to Russia some years back and then came back to the U.S. as had been reported in the newspapers. The gun store owner could then tip off the FBI which would create a headache for Oswald as he was trying to dodge the FBI in this timeframe. 

GD---

At this late date, I cannot prove that ID was, or was not, required at the time in Texas by individual gun-shop owners. It was not required by law. 

Most merchants are always happy to conclude a cash sale. Especially a cash sale. 

In any event, LHO, if need be, apparently had the ability to secure fake IDs. 

LHO's mail-ordering of guns has always been an oddity. 

 

[Gerry Down]

29 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

GD---

At this late date, I cannot prove that ID was, or was not, required at the time in Texas by individual gun-shop owners. It was not required by law. 

Most merchants are always happy to conclude a cash sale. Especially a cash sale. 

In any event, LHO, if need be, apparently had the ability to secure fake IDs. 

LHO's mail-ordering of guns has always been an oddity. 

 

It seems no one has proof one way or the other on this issue yet keep saying it over and over again that LHO could buy a rifle in Dallas without showing ID. The Hidell ID would be no good at a gun store because that fake ID was crude and could be quiet possibly spotted by gun store owners who would be on the look-out for fake IDs. It would be much easier to pass off a fake ID at a post office where the people looking at the IDs would be lax.

I don't have proof that gun store owners were requiring ID, but one thing makes me think they might:

Texas led the United States in homicide and “Big D” (Dallas) led Texas. There were more murders in Dallas each month than in all England ...nearly 3 out of every 4 slayings (72%) were by gunfire. 

From "The Death Of A President" by William Manchester

With so many criminals using guns in crime, I could see how gun store owners, by simply being good citizens, required people to show ID when buying guns as a means of deterrent. And i'm theorizing that this is what caused LHO to go down the mail ordering route. 

Edited April 10, 2023 by Gerry Down

[Benjamin Cole]

2 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

It seems no one has proof one way or the other on this issue yet keep saying it over and over again that LHO could buy a rifle in Dallas without showing ID. The Hidell ID would be no good at a gun store because that fake ID was crude and could be quiet possibly spotted by gun store owners who would be on the look-out for fake IDs. It would be much easier to pass off a fake ID at a post office where the people looking at the IDs would be lax.

I don't have proof that gun store owners were requiring ID, but one thing makes me think they might:

Texas led the United States in homicide and “Big D” (Dallas) led Texas. There were more murders in Dallas each month than in all England ...nearly 3 out of every 4 slayings (72%) were by gunfire. 

From "The Death Of A President" by William Manchester

With so many criminals using guns in crime, I could see how gun store owners, by simply being good citizens, required people to show ID when buying guns as a means of deterrent. And i'm theorizing that this is what caused LHO to go down the mail ordering route. 

Maybe you are right, but I would say it is a stretch. 

Contemporary accounts from Dallas at the time assert anyone could buy a gun for cash, no ID required. ID was not required by law. I have never read about certain gun-shops, of their own accord, requiring ID. 

You can peruse online, and see if you come up with something that lends credence to your theory. 

Of course, even if some Dallas gun-shops required ID, then LHO could merely go to a gun-shop that did not require ID. 

 

 

[Gerry Down]

9 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Maybe you are right, but I would say it is a stretch. 

Contemporary accounts from Dallas at the time assert anyone could buy a gun for cash, no ID required. ID was not required by law. I have never read about certain gun-shops, of their own accord, requiring ID. 

You can peruse online, and see if you come up with something that lends credence to your theory. 

Of course, even if some Dallas gun-shops required ID, then LHO could merely go to a gun-shop that did not require ID. 

 

 

I'm just picturing a scene where a thug comes into the shop covered in tattoos and wants to buy a handgun. Am I going to sell it to him no questions asked or will I ask for ID?

I'm going to ask for ID.

If someone doesn't want to show ID in buying a gun, they have no business buying a gun in my opinion. 

[Benjamin Cole]

30 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

I'm just picturing a scene where a thug comes into the shop covered in tattoos and wants to buy a handgun. Am I going to sell it to him no questions asked or will I ask for ID?

I'm going to ask for ID.

If someone doesn't want to show ID in buying a gun, they have no business buying a gun in my opinion. 

Verily, that is your opinion.

Many people in Texas, especially in 1963, did not agree with you. A gun-shop owner assumed no responsibility with what a buyer did with the gun, and did not consider themselves an arm of the law. 

A gun-shop owner might reason even if a tough-guy came into the shop, he needed the weapon for self-protection. Maybe the buyer worked for a bail bondsman, or just lived in a bad neighborhood.

Low-income people in America certainly need self-protection, in almost every low-income urban neighborhood. 

Some people reason that pitchforks, knives and various poisons are sold without record. 

If you want to get spooked for the day, read up on barium acetate.

Then imagine JFK witnesses dying of heart attacks. Like Guy Banister. 

Should sale of barium acetate be regulated? ID required? I wish I had never read about barium acetate.