LTC License Validation Website

[seph]

I think the site shows that message by default if the ltc is NOT invalid.

[RicoTX]

I didn't see any actual data come back, just a simple "is valid" return, so I'm not sure what the issue is? I would be highly concerned if it returned any personal information whatsoever.

Maybe it's not actually active yet?

[Scott B.]

It's working as advertised. A go/no-go check.

However, I don't see it being used much if at all by FFLs. Particularly when they read the line, 'not legally required.' At least not until ATF decides to draft a new administrative rule.

[03Lightningrocks]

I am pro 2nd amendment. Any laws or regulations added to such is anti 2nd amendment. If it is voluntary, fine. The minute they modify and make it compulsory, it is one more step in taking away our rights. One inch at a time folks, one inch at a time.

[flechero]

I think the site shows that message by default if the ltc is NOT invalid.

Screenshot_20191115-132038.jpg

I was thinking they only enter info of non-valid LTC's so anything not listed is OK. That way there is no mistaking a GG for a BG.

I ran mine just to see what actually comes back and there is no personal info returned:

This license may be used as an alternative permit under 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(t) to purchase a firearm as of 11/16/2019.

[flechero]

I am pro 2nd amendment. Any laws or regulations added to such is anti 2nd amendment. If it is voluntary, fine. The minute they modify and make it compulsory, it is one more step in taking away our rights. One inch at a time folks, one inch at a time.

I read your post and thought yep, I agree but then I thought, hmm... background checks are already mandatory and LTC allows us to skip the insta-check- but the intent was always that a VALID LTC was required. The questions has been asked in the past how could they know if your LTC wasn't valid.

I don't like any further infringement but this is like checking to see a DL is valid... and LEO's do that with every traffic stop.

So I ask honestly- because I'm thinking I may have missed something.... what is it about this (if it became mandatory) that you object to ?

[DocV]

I am pro 2nd amendment. Any laws or regulations added to such is anti 2nd amendment. If it is voluntary, fine. The minute they modify and make it compulsory, it is one more step in taking away our rights. One inch at a time folks, one inch at a time.

I read your post and thought yep, I agree but then I thought, hmm... background checks are already mandatory and LTC allows us to skip the insta-check- but the intent was always that a VALID LTC was required. The questions has been asked in the past how could they know if your LTC wasn't valid.

I don't like any further infringement but this is like checking to see a DL is valid... and LEO's do that with every traffic stop.

So I ask honestly- because I'm thinking I may have missed something.... what is it about this (if it became mandatory) that you object to ?

Given the intended purpose of the site, one possible objection is timestamping and IP geolocation stamping of an LTC ID apparently transferring a firearm. Hence, the information could be used as a "soft" firearm registry. Of course, that information is available to ATF via the current physical inspection process but automating the process adds an efficiency not yet acheivable.

[ScottDLS]

I am alright with it... after all, we are allowing someone to bypass a NICS check with this card. If you are an FFL, the very least that you should do is train your employees on the security features of a Texas ID and LTC card, and then use this website to verify that an LTC is valid.

I have a PowerPoint presentation on license security features. If anyone wants it, pm me your email address.

It does seem fairly innocuous, but I'm not sure what problem it solves. The Federal government provides the requirements for states to follow if they want their permit to be used by for FFL's to bypass the NICS check. There is no federal requirement in the law for a FFL to electronically check the license validity of a 18 USC 922 qualified state permit. Now all of a sudden the State introduces another hoop? What if the TXDPS check says invalid, then the FFL subsequently runs the NICS check and the person passes? There are many non-prohibiting reasons in Texas why the LTC check could fail. You could have your permit revoked for a class A misdemeanor conviction and still be eligible to purchase a gun. You could have it suspended for a pending misdemeanor charge. You now put the FFL in a situation where he has a "possible" indicator that the person is prohibited, but NICS says he is not...and we all know NICS is 100% accurate, right? And now since the DPS check is open to the public, how many of you are going to ask for it for a private sale? Ahhh the elusive universal background check... I see where this is going. In my opinion it is within the legal authority of the State to pass a background check for private sales, but I don't think Texas should. It solves no problem that isn't already addressed by making murder and assault illegal. I've purchased a pistol and an AR-15 lower in a private sales (for cash in the parking lot of a mall). Both purchases were legal and "private" and in my opinion should continue to be.

[ScottDLS]

I am pro 2nd amendment. Any laws or regulations added to such is anti 2nd amendment. If it is voluntary, fine. The minute they modify and make it compulsory, it is one more step in taking away our rights. One inch at a time folks, one inch at a time.

I read your post and thought yep, I agree but then I thought, hmm... background checks are already mandatory and LTC allows us to skip the insta-check- but the intent was always that a VALID LTC was required. The questions has been asked in the past how could they know if your LTC wasn't valid.

I don't like any further infringement but this is like checking to see a DL is valid... and LEO's do that with every traffic stop.

So I ask honestly- because I'm thinking I may have missed something.... what is it about this (if it became mandatory) that you object to ?

Given the intended purpose of the site, one possible objection is timestamping and IP geolocation stamping of an LTC ID apparently transferring a firearm. Hence, the information could be used as a "soft" firearm registry. Of course, that information is available to ATF via the current physical inspection process but automating the process adds an efficiency not yet acheivable.

Always use a VPN.

[03Lightningrocks]

I am pro 2nd amendment. Any laws or regulations added to such is anti 2nd amendment. If it is voluntary, fine. The minute they modify and make it compulsory, it is one more step in taking away our rights. One inch at a time folks, one inch at a time.

I read your post and thought yep, I agree but then I thought, hmm... background checks are already mandatory and LTC allows us to skip the insta-check- but the intent was always that a VALID LTC was required. The questions has been asked in the past how could they know if your LTC wasn't valid.

I don't like any further infringement but this is like checking to see a DL is valid... and LEO's do that with every traffic stop.

So I ask honestly- because I'm thinking I may have missed something.... what is it about this (if it became mandatory) that you object to ?

The first steps of being put on a list. The first step for an additional requirement when buying a firearm. One inch at a time. Meaning, slowly adding barriers that folks think, "won't affect me" until eventually it, "does affect me".

[DocV]

I am pro 2nd amendment. Any laws or regulations added to such is anti 2nd amendment. If it is voluntary, fine. The minute they modify and make it compulsory, it is one more step in taking away our rights. One inch at a time folks, one inch at a time.

I read your post and thought yep, I agree but then I thought, hmm... background checks are already mandatory and LTC allows us to skip the insta-check- but the intent was always that a VALID LTC was required. The questions has been asked in the past how could they know if your LTC wasn't valid.

I don't like any further infringement but this is like checking to see a DL is valid... and LEO's do that with every traffic stop.

So I ask honestly- because I'm thinking I may have missed something.... what is it about this (if it became mandatory) that you object to ?

Given the intended purpose of the site, one possible objection is timestamping and IP geolocation stamping of an LTC ID apparently transferring a firearm. Hence, the information could be used as a "soft" firearm registry. Of course, that information is available to ATF via the current physical inspection process but automating the process adds an efficiency not yet acheivable.

Always use a VPN.

Not good enough. Anyone with access to tier 1 and tier 2 instrumentation (netflow) data can establish traffic endpoints.

[Charles L. Cotton]

This capability could prove to beneficial to Texas LTCs carrying in other states. If a LEO in that state questions the validity of a person's LTC, it can be quickly confirmed. I don't think it happens often, but I have had a few people claim it was an issue during a traffic stop. My guess is that the LEOs involved were anti-gun, or the LTC was doing something that raised a concern.

Chas.

[Jusme]

I am pro 2nd amendment. Any laws or regulations added to such is anti 2nd amendment. If it is voluntary, fine. The minute they modify and make it compulsory, it is one more step in taking away our rights. One inch at a time folks, one inch at a time.

I read your post and thought yep, I agree but then I thought, hmm... background checks are already mandatory and LTC allows us to skip the insta-check- but the intent was always that a VALID LTC was required. The questions has been asked in the past how could they know if your LTC wasn't valid.

I don't like any further infringement but this is like checking to see a DL is valid... and LEO's do that with every traffic stop.

So I ask honestly- because I'm thinking I may have missed something.... what is it about this (if it became mandatory) that you object to ?

It is one more step closer to trying to disarm law abiding citizens. If you sign the 4473 form that contains your LTC info, you are declaring, under penalty of perjury, that it is valid. I seriously doubt, that very many gun sales were completed by those holding invalid LTC. If the FFL has any doubts, he can always run a background check anyway. I realize it’s not mandatory, but I have no doubt that it soon could be. JMHO

[ScottDLS]

I am pro 2nd amendment. Any laws or regulations added to such is anti 2nd amendment. If it is voluntary, fine. The minute they modify and make it compulsory, it is one more step in taking away our rights. One inch at a time folks, one inch at a time.

I read your post and thought yep, I agree but then I thought, hmm... background checks are already mandatory and LTC allows us to skip the insta-check- but the intent was always that a VALID LTC was required. The questions has been asked in the past how could they know if your LTC wasn't valid.

I don't like any further infringement but this is like checking to see a DL is valid... and LEO's do that with every traffic stop.

So I ask honestly- because I'm thinking I may have missed something.... what is it about this (if it became mandatory) that you object to ?

Given the intended purpose of the site, one possible objection is timestamping and IP geolocation stamping of an LTC ID apparently transferring a firearm. Hence, the information could be used as a "soft" firearm registry. Of course, that information is available to ATF via the current physical inspection process but automating the process adds an efficiency not yet acheivable.

Always use a VPN.

Not good enough. Anyone with access to tier 1 and tier 2 instrumentation (netflow) data can establish traffic endpoints.

Let’s break that down. You want to Geolocate and timestamp the individual purchasing the firearm based on the request to DPS for the validation during a (presumed) firearm transaction to build a soft registry of guns to their owners....So first you have access to (all) net flow data tier one and tier two ( by definition worldwide) and you’re monitoring...in real time presumably, ALL internet traffic. You monitor the endPoint of the DPS server serving LTC checks. Then by determining the timing of the request, from the https request from the VPN exit point you scan and geolocate every incoming request to every entry point of that VPN that happened at that time (+/- .50 sec or so) to see if it is near a FFL location (what about private sales?) Then presumably DPS gives you all the LTC numbers transmitted in the request(s)...or do you crack the https request? Well since you have the NSA onboard presumably for the monitoring, what’s a little cipher cracking of AES 256 anyway? Then you make the “soft” registry of LTC to gun how? With NICS you don’t even have the serial number transmitted anyway, so how is ATF even making a soft registry currently. Presumably by (illegally) collecting all the 4473s in real time and putting them in the registry, which would capture LTCs and non LTCs with significantly less effort than real-time monitoring of worldwide internet traffic and without needing the assistance of DPS or the NSA. Even monitoring the non VPN requests to DPS and correlating them to FFL locations would be mostly useless. Note for VPNs, all this effectively has to be done in real time because they don’t keep logs and the exit point traffic Is mixed with thousands of other people’s. I don’t think the DPS IP for LTC check is unique, so I guess your opening the HTTPS request headers to get the URL...maybe the full URL is exposed before negotiating the SSL session? Or does the VPN endpoint establish the SSL session with the generic DPS/Texas.gov IP then pass the full URL request...NSA needed again to crack the SSL in real time. It took the FBI over a year to find Ross Ulbricht and bring down Silk Road black market even with warrants and cooperation of international authorities. He was using Tor which is more powerful (and way slower) than most commercial VPNs, but still if you want to maintain a pretty robust level of privacy from the Government and hackers a good start is a decent commercial VPN.

[03Lightningrocks]

It took the FBI over a year to find Ross Ulbricht and bring down Silk Road black market even with warrants and cooperation of international authorities. He was using Tor which is more powerful (and way slower) than most commercial VPNs, but still if you want to maintain a pretty robust level of privacy from the Government and hackers a good start is a decent commercial VPN.

That was On the job training. There was an extreme learning curve. They now have the ability to track it down in weeks or less. As for the remainder of your post. I remember when nobody believed the DOJ in co-ordination with the FBI and CIA would ever spy on a presidential candidate. We must not be naive in thinking there are limitations to the level of corruption our government will go to take away the rights of American citizens. The deep state does exist and is utilized for the elite to maintain power over the people. There is a concerted effort on the part of people in our government to put an end to the We The People part of the constitution.