Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: eForms Error Correction Process

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    From a software developer perspective, I can pretty much promise you that the issue isn't REALLY "coding errors"; it's much more likely that someone was cut corners and/or didn't take the time to understand what the requirements of the system are. The removal of the special characters was a deliberate choice made by someone, and was most likely a "quick fix" to an error that was found while storing those characters in the database. Sadly, this sort of thing is all too common as doing it the "right way" (by escaping the character(s)) is much more involved and time consuming.

    As a separate thought, given the level of access to data required to build such an application, it should be a trivial matter to get simple counts of transferable items in the NFRTR.

    Then again, that data in the wild could really shake up the NFA market. Imagine what would happen if people found out that there were, in fact, only 300 "X"'s when people thought there were tens of thousands, and in fact 1,000 Y's when only 5 were thought to exist. Oh my!
    Last edited by sillycon; 01-30-2014 at 06:56 PM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by sillycon View Post
    As a separate thought, given the level of access to data required to build such an application, it should be a trivial matter to get simple counts of transferable items in the NFRTR.

    Then again, that data in the wild could really shake up the NFA market. Imagine what would happen if people found out that there were, in fact, only 300 "X"'s when people thought there were tens of thousands, and in fact 1,000 Y's when only 5 were thought to exist. Oh my!
    It would never happen. I tend to think that even with the lowball estimates, the numbers of MGs might be enough that a lawyer could argue that they are "in common use" as defined by Heller and deserve 2A protection and therefor overturn the '86 ban. The anti-gunners could not risk it even with the low odds.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •