PCN-TV Pennsylvania's Gun Laws debate 5-19-08

[danp]

Originally Posted by WitsBusa

I'm listening to this debate on the PCN feed. I'm hoping to get some help from you guys / gals on here, as I'm having some confusion.

The one thing that I do believe which will be troublesome to a lot of people is the objection to a requirement that if you become aware that you handgun is lost or stolen, that you report the situation. Initially, it sounded like Kim was describing a lot of boot strapping other stuff onto the potential law.

Is there also a concern that prosecutors would question when you "should have known" about the theft and coming after you in any event?

I would think that if someone steals a gun from me, I WOULD probably tell the authorities, as god forbid they use it to burglarize my neighbor and kill them, and if my firearm is in the database, I'm in for a world of headache.

What is the objectionable aspect of this type of reporting requirement, if it would include clear language that such report would not be used to prejudice the individual's future rights.

Another thing that crosses my mind is that if someone is losing or having a number of weapons stolen, I'm not sure if I don't start having some questions about that individual and their responsibility.

Anyway, thanks in advance for any thoughts.

1. Someone engaged in straw purchasing (which constitutes multiple state and federal felonies) most likely will be be dissuaded by fines and misdemeanor charges for failing to report their straw purchased guns lost or stolen
2. There are 5th amendment issues. The supreme court has already ruled that felons can't be forced to register guns because it would force them to incriminate themselves for felon-in-possession. A similar argument could be made that straw purchasers could not be forced to illegally claim their firearms were lost or stolen.

Ultimately responsible firearm owners will report lost and stolen guns, but fining them and putting them in jail for not doing so (or not being aware that they have to) when criminals will still roam free makes no sense.

Laws should not be implemented because "they don't sound too bad" they should be implemented when they are highly likely to create the desired result (stopping straw purchasing) without unnecessarily burdening the average person.

These victimized twice/lost & stolen laws meet neither of those criteria and as such are bad law.

[WitsBusa]

Thanks for your response.. I don't know that I followed it, so I want to be sure.

I see that a target for the reporting requirements would be to address straw purchases. So you're saying that reporting, again, wouldn't address these straw purchasers because there might be a constitutionality defense for the people engaged in the illegal activity? I think I'm following.

So your thought is that it ONLY affects, potentially negatively, those lawful owners who report (as I understand, no prejudice if you report, but inconvenienced?) or lawful owners who are not aware of the responsibility?

Based on your premise that straw purchasers obviously won't report, and authorities won't know until the gun turns up elsewhere or involved in a crime (which view I share), I just don't know what that kind of law will accomplish.

Problem is, I think many sheeple will think intuitively that the reporting of a lost or stolen gun only makes sense, and will find opposition to be highly suspect and a target for attacks on credibility.

It would seem to me that a better course on that topic is to focus hard on narrowly tailoring any responsibility so as to avoid any misinterpretation or misapplication to the detriment of responsible gun owners.

[headcase]

In addition, IIRC, the wording stated that you had a certain time frame to report them from when they were stolen, not when you discovered them stolen or missing, even though Mr. Grace specifically mentions reporting them "when you discover" them missing. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[BenningBoy]

Failure to report would, had these passed, have been a summary offense initially. This could impact your ability to acquire a LTCF if pressed. That was along with the one handgun a month bill. Mr. Grace offers, in explanation, "Why do you need more than one a month?" I have only on one occaision purchased two in a month, but I don't need a politician telling me how to be fiscally responsible. And the recurring theme of the SKS as God of assault weapons got tiresome quickly.

[BenningBoy]

Originally Posted by headcase

In addition, IIRC, the wording stated that you had a certain time frame to report them from when they were stolen, not when you discovered them stolen or missing, even though Mr. Grace specifically mentions reporting them "when you discover" them missing. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

IIRC, 72 hours.

[WitsBusa]

Thanks for the info. guys about the reporting time frame. That IS garbage to have a short time frame, and no safe harbor regarding discovery. I would imagine that most responsible gun owners have a pretty good handle on the guns they own, and would recognize if one is missing.. then again, a LOT of people's collections are bigger than mine, so maybe this would present a challenge.

I guess my question is if you can address obvious issues like time frame and confirming no prejudice to the gun owner in a reasonable manner, would reporting a stolen firearm offend you?

[danp]

Originally Posted by WitsBusa

I see that a target for the reporting requirements would be to address straw purchases. So you're saying that reporting, again, wouldn't address these straw purchasers because there might be a constitutionality defense for the people engaged in the illegal activity? I think I'm following.

That is one possible issue. If I was out buying guns to resell to gang members, my first defense in court would be that a lost/stolen reporting law would force me to incriminate myself by filing a false police report.

Originally Posted by WitsBusa

So your thought is that it ONLY affects, potentially negatively, those lawful owners who report (as I understand, no prejudice if you report, but inconvenienced?) or lawful owners who are not aware of the responsibility?

Either way. Straw purchasers are either not going to care or they are going to lie.

Originally Posted by WitsBusa

Based on your premise that straw purchasers obviously won't report, and authorities won't know until the gun turns up elsewhere or involved in a crime (which view I share), I just don't know what that kind of law will accomplish.

Exactly, it will accomplish nothing.

Originally Posted by WitsBusa

Problem is, I think many sheeple will think intuitively that the reporting of a lost or stolen gun only makes sense, and will find opposition to be highly suspect and a target for attacks on credibility.

This is exactly the problem. However we have been successful in educating politicians as to why these laws are pointless so far.

Originally Posted by WitsBusa

It would seem to me that a better course on that topic is to focus hard on narrowly tailoring any responsibility so as to avoid any misinterpretation or misapplication to the detriment of responsible gun owners.

Appeasement is never a solution. We can not accept bad laws just because we have to work to educate people on why they are bad. Our job is to prevent these things.

Additionally, one other issue I have with these laws is the subtle undertone of "Well if we can't prove someone committed crime X let's just make a new law we can charge them with that is easier to prosecute."

Lowering the burden of proof to put people in jail makes me uneasy on any issue.

[BenningBoy]

Originally Posted by WitsBusa

Thanks for the info. guys about the reporting time frame. That IS garbage to have a short time frame, and no safe harbor regarding discovery. I would imagine that most responsible gun owners have a pretty good handle on the guns they own, and would recognize if one is missing.. then again, a LOT of people's collections are bigger than mine, so maybe this would present a challenge.

I guess my question is if you can address obvious issues like time frame and confirming no prejudice to the gun owner in a reasonable manner, would reporting a stolen firearm offend you?

I would report if someone stole anything from me. But no other object you own carries a penalty against YOU if stolen. If I didn't report my lawnmower stolen, I wouldn't have a cop on my doorstep. If I didn't miss my mower for a week (quite possible), no penalty.

[WitsBusa]

Thanks for the replies, guys.

I hear you danp on the slippery slope phenomenon. No doubt the give an inch, try to take a mile approach would be occur.

And Benningboy.. you're hitting on what I think is a significant perception point.. one that I occasionally fall into. There should not be a distinction with respect to my lawfully owned property. I actually thought about that when Grace said something to the effect of "you would call the police if your car was stolen, wouldn't you?". My immediate thought was, well if I chose not to, I wouldn't get in trouble for it.

That's a big hurdle I see with the "sheeple". Obviously, these folks wouldn't expect to have to report to the police when their ipod disappears, but of COURSE the nasty death machine firearm must be reported to the police or the sky will fall on our heads, and there will be chaos in the streets.

[WhiteFeather]

Originally Posted by WitsBusa

I'm listening to this debate on the PCN feed. I'm hoping to get some help from you guys / gals on here, as I'm having some confusion.

The one thing that I do believe which will be troublesome to a lot of people is the objection to a requirement that if you become aware that you handgun is lost or stolen, that you report the situation. Initially, it sounded like Kim was describing a lot of boot strapping other stuff onto the potential law.

Is there also a concern that prosecutors would question when you "should have known" about the theft and coming after you in any event?

I would think that if someone steals a gun from me, I WOULD probably tell the authorities, as god forbid they use it to burglarize my neighbor and kill them, and if my firearm is in the database, I'm in for a world of headache.

What is the objectionable aspect of this type of reporting requirement, if it would include clear language that such report would not be used to prejudice the individual's future rights.

Another thing that crosses my mind is that if someone is losing or having a number of weapons stolen, I'm not sure if I don't start having some questions about that individual and their responsibility.

Anyway, thanks in advance for any thoughts.

WitsBusa

I would like to address you question with examples, like many things in life it takes understanding and education on complex issues to make informed decisions using wisdom, NOT a feel good approach to enacting restrictions on Constitutional rights.

Also you will see people like this Joe Grace using emotional arguments and implied psychological baggage phases to win the debate with the uninformed.

“assault” weapon – media coined term that most gun owners now use
“Saturday night” special – to imply a whole range on inexpensive firearms.
“Hate” crime
“common sense”
“reasonable restrictions”
“weak gun laws”
Plus lots of others emotion words you will always often see and hear used in this fight by other side with no facts, just feelings, note they will keep using the phrase even when they are given the correct defintion.

Very clever psycholpolitcs warfare is being used to disarm US.

If you read this PAFOA article pushing for a mandatory lost or stolen firearm.
http://www.pafoa.org/forum/pennsylva...er-barrel.html

You will notice if straw purchase is such a BIG problem, the DA’s would be aggressively prosecuting them to send a clear message to criminals with strong sentences as a deterrent, but instead in violet law article a person can do it 10 times and get caught to ONLY receive a plea bargain deal for probation. Note two firearm where not recovered yet at sentencing time, the straw purchaser should have received a possible 42 years in jail for the numerous offensives.

Also Kim Stolfer mentioned it that the Philly DA’s almost never prosecute straw purchasers its another inconvenient fact. It’s in a long AG article on PAFOA (I forget the name of it, it’s posted in political section)

The other problem in politics in general and specifically with regards to proposed legislation READ IT FOR YOURSELF, don’t trust anyone as to what it supposed to do or don’t do. The devil is in the details of the actual proposed language, and sometime you have to study it, because sometime it’s deliberately written to deceive people that are not lawyers.

http://acslpa.org/n-legislative/pa_p...egislation.htm
On this link it has proposed legislation link read all of them but looking at the top ones listed will get you up to speed and some have hot links to actual proposed legislation or by cross referencing.

There is lots of info there, and it’s put there for people like you to become personally involved in the fight to keep your rights with an education on with an eye toward total information awareness of what is at stake, same reason as why PAFOA was created and exist for.
Education on gun owners is the key and the long term goal.
People can not remain free and be ignorant.



http://acslpa.org/n-legislative/pa_p...egislation.htm

PA Proposed Firearm legislation 2007-2008


Anti Gun Rights Bills Summary as of March 25, 2008

PA Firearms Laws & PA Commission on Sentencing Reports

pa_proposed_firearm_legislation Hunting 2_14_08.htm

pro gun legislation summary as of Oct 2007.htm