Talk:National Tracing Center

Glossay of terms[edit]

Other than the opening sentence, the whole article is a collection of glossary of terms. This article needs a major cleanup and re-write to achieve a focus. --BatteryIncluded (talk) 16:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Response[edit]

This page was essentially a copy of a public domain government document describing the National Tracing Center, with a few additional definitions critical to understanding their function. If you have any suggestions for improving the focus, please let me know and I'll submit a revision.... (Computer Guy 2 (talk) 14:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

In my latest revision, I made major content and structural changes to improve the format and focus. Additional changes will follow as time permits. (Computer Guy 2 (talk) 16:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Massive NPOV problems[edit]

The article as it currently stands is massively anti-regulation. When is it ever neutral to call certain legal opinions "spin"? And there is much more of this kind. -- 77.7.149.222 (talk) 12:21, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV[edit]

There is no "anti-regulation" content, but an attempt to present the National Tracing Center and it's mission in an objective light - warts and all. ATF is massively "pro-regulation", and this article attempts to present a balanced view.

When this agency calls all traced guns "crime guns" when most are traced for some other reason than crime, then the agency has put a "spin" on the semantics.

When they use the phrase "time to crime", and in fact the specific time actually refers to "time to trace" or "time to observation", or "time to law enforcement custody", then the agency has put a "spin" on the semantics.

When they describe a gun as a "suspect gun" when in fact it was one of several older guns bought by an innocent legitimate collector, then the agency has put a "spin" on the semantics.

When this agency testifies before Congress that "90% of the guns seized in Mexico came from the United States", and in fact less than 25% were traced to the United States, then the agency put a "spin" on the semantics. Or would it be better to say the agency lied to Congress and the American public?

There is nothing sacrosanct about legal opinions.... Lawyers are very skilled at putting a "spin" on the semantics.

Pointing out that ATF puts a "spin" on facts is far more NPOV than pointing out that they lied....... (Computer Guy 2 (talk) 05:26, 6 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Not done: {{edit semi-protected}} is not required for edits to semi-protected, unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. If you have an issue with the content, make the changes yourself. elektrik SHOOS 08:19, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I used the "Edit semi-protected" incorrectly. (Computer Guy 2 (talk) 13:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC))[reply]

ATF openly admits violating the law?[edit]

In the "Controversies" section, a sentence begins with "Nevertheless, in apparent violation of the intent and letter of the law," and this source is provided for that part of the sentence. The source is ATF's "Congressional Budget Submission" for "Fiscal Year 2010". Unsurprisingly, I cannot find anything in it where the ATF refers to its own actions and/or programs as being in violation of the law.

If the source does not support that statement (the "in apparent violation of the intent and letter of the law" part), and no other source can be found to support it, then it should be removed. Like everything else on Wikipedia, accusations of lawbreaking should be supported by reliable, published sources. Jdaloner (talk) 19:58, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on National Tracing Center. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:54, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]