Mr. Witaschek had to sign the form to verify that he will personally appear at the registry office within 48 hours if he moves to or works in the city.
But the terms of the gun-registry and how the list is used are cloaked in mystery.
The Gun Offender Registry was enacted in 2009 in the gun-control law written by the D.C. Council after the Supreme Court ruled in the Heller decision that the 30-year-old ban on handguns was unconstitutional.
In the statute, the registry cannot be made public, like a sex-offenders registry. However, Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier is lawfully allowed to “make gun-offender registration information available to other local, state or federal government agencies.”
Chief Lanier’s spokesman, Gwendolyn Crump, would only say that the “Criminal Investigations Division Gun Offender Registry maintains the list.”
An aide to D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, who wrote the original law, explained that the list is an “internal tool” for the police. She said that the list is for “enhanced monitoring by the Department after court monitoring ends, and also a deterrent for offenders, who are aware that they are on the registry.”
It is not clear whether someone on the D.C. gun-offenders list would be blocked from passing an FBI background check to purchase a firearm.
Neither the police nor the D.C. Council could tell me if the list is put in the FBI’s National Instant Background Check system.
Federal law bars felons from possessing guns, but people such as Mr. Witaschek who are convicted of nonviolent misdemeanor offense are on this registry.
For example, I wrote in 2012 about Army Spc. Adam Meckler, who was forced onto the gun-offenders registry for having long-forgotten loose rounds of 9mm ammo in the District.
For Mr. Witaschek, the registration process took less than 30 minutes sinc e no other offenders were in the office at the same time.
Outside the police station, I asked Mr. Witaschek how he felt about submitting to this requirement of his sentence given by Judge Robert Morin.
“I was found guilty of something that is not even illegal and forced to register for something that is not illegal,” Mr. Witaschek said. He paused, then he just shook his head.
Mr. Witaschek is appealing his conviction both on technical grounds that muzzleloaders bullets are not classified as ammunition under the law and on the constitutional grounds that his Second Amendment rights have been infringed.