I believe you'll find that the fact the crime was committed in DC makes the data relevant to DC jurisdiction. On the other hand, DC police could not request trace data relevant to a crime committed in, say, Ocean City, Maryland, because the crime occurred outside their jurisdiction. But Ocean City PD could. It's where the crime was committed, not where the gun was bought, that governs applicable jurisdiction for the investigation of the crime.
Now, if Ocean City PD were to discover that prior to its use in the crime, the gun had been stolen — or perhaps fenced — in DC, then DC Police would have jurisdiction and access to trace data to investigate the theft. However, they still wouldn't have jurisdiction over the crime committed in Ocean City.
Thus your objection appears to be based on a misunderstanding of the law.
no subject
Now, if Ocean City PD were to discover that prior to its use in the crime, the gun had been stolen — or perhaps fenced — in DC, then DC Police would have jurisdiction and access to trace data to investigate the theft. However, they still wouldn't have jurisdiction over the crime committed in Ocean City.
Thus your objection appears to be based on a misunderstanding of the law.