Pa. Patriot ARRESTED at the OC dinner @ The Old Country Buffet in Dickson City 5/9

[Pa. Patriot]

Originally Posted by indianjack

"the state police gun sales database indicated it had been purchased by his wife, Darcie."

How is this not a form of gun Registration?

We feel it is. However, when ACSL sued Ridge and the PSP over this the court decided that since the database was only certain type of sales/transfers, that it was not a "registry". IOW, since it is not complete it is not an "ownership registry".

This is ridiculous and flies in the face of what 18Pa.C.S.6111.4 intends, but it is the supreme courts ruling.

Luckily, this clarification still benefits us in that LEO agencies can NOT now claim that the database means something in regards to ownership.
Since not all handgun transfers are in it it is meaningless as a check of ownership.

Read all about the lawsuit, and the road to the supreme court, here:
http://www.acslpa.org/n-register/n-registration.html

[CQB]

So how/who determines that a particular weapon will be put into the database?

If it isn't "complete" than wht/who determines the database complete and when is that determined?

Why is it that in PA whenever you buy a handgun or rifle you have to fill out the PA form with it? Wouldn't that make ALL weapons registered in PA?

[mjfletcher]

Originally Posted by Pa. Patriot

We feel it is. However, when ACSL sued Ridge and the PSP over this the court decided that since the database was only certain type of sales/transfers, that it was not a "registry". IOW, since it is not complete it is not an "ownership registry".

This is ridiculous and flies in the face of what 18Pa.C.S.6111.4 intends, but it is the supreme courts ruling.

Luckily, this clarification still benefits us in that LEO agencies can NOT now claim that the database means something in regards to ownership.
Since not all handgun transfers are in it it is meaningless as a check of ownership.

Read all about the lawsuit, and the road to the supreme court, here:
http://www.acslpa.org/n-register/n-registration.html

So does this mean the DCPD could be sued for illegally using the sales database as a registry? Or would it be the PSP who are liable for allowing it to be used as such?

Originally Posted by CQB

So how/who determines that a particular weapon will be put into the database?

If it isn't "complete" than wht/who determines the database complete and when is that determined?

Why is it that in PA whenever you buy a handgun or rifle you have to fill out the PA form with it? Wouldn't that make ALL weapons registered in PA?

Any weapons transferred through an FFL could be deemed to be 'registered,' but since not all transfers need to go through an FFL, only some (or most) would be registered.

[Pa. Patriot]

Originally Posted by CQB

So how/who determines that a particular weapon will be put into the database?

If it isn't "complete" than wht/who determines the database complete and when is that determined?

Why is it that in PA whenever you buy a handgun or rifle you have to fill out the PA form with it? Wouldn't that make ALL weapons registered in PA?

I thought I already explained this to you, in person.

1) Pursuant to 18Pa.C.S.§6111, generally, all sales from an FFL as well as transfers of ownership of other persons (sales/gifts/trades/etc) of firearms (as defined in 6102) must be done by an FFL or Sheriff and a form SP4-113 executed.
The county sheriff gets a copy of the SP4-113 and they send the info periodically to the PSP for their "database".

2) There ARE exceptions to #1 above. spouse to spouse, child-parent-grandparent as well as FFL's are exempt from the requirement to execute a SP4-113 or have the transfer conducted at an FFL/Sheriff.
Additionally, you can bring handguns from out of state when you move to Pa. You could also have handguns that were yours BEFORE 6111 took effect... among other reasons our handgun would not show up on the database.

3) Rifles are not subject to the provisions of 6111 and are not put on the Pa. form SP4-113 (Application/Record of Sale) Only firearms defined in 18Pa.C.S.§6102, which is handguns, SBS ad SBRs.

4) A true "registry" is prohibited by 18Pa.C.S.§6111.4.

Read the link I provided in the post prior to yours to read about how the PSP "database" is not a registry in the eyes of the SCOPA.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by indianjack

How is this not a form of gun Registration?

simple. you just redefine "any registry" to mean "a complete registry" (and then also completely ignore the section of code mandating that the PICS application data be destroyed within 72 hours.)

this is not at all unlike the practice of redefining "shall not be questioned" to mean "it is OK to ask questions" or redefining "infringe" to mean "deny".

come on man...get with the program.

[Pa. Patriot]

Originally Posted by mjfletcher

So does this mean the DCPD could be sued for illegally using the sales database as a registry? Or would it be the PSP who are liable for allowing it to be used as such?

The database is a "tool" to help trace guns used in crimes. Or at least the ia what the PSP whined and cried about when they were sued. Forget that they could not cite one single case that the database "solved".. , but I digress...

They make it available to PD's for presumably the same purpose.

Unfortunately some rogue and/or blatantly ignorant PD's use the database as a registry. (And DA's tell them to). Yes, hopefully they will be found to be liable for damages due to using the database as something clearly and specifically prohibited by law... But that's for the court to decide.

Originally Posted by mjfletcher

Any weapons transferred through an FFL could be deemed to be 'registered,' but since not all transfers need to go through an FFL, only some (or most) would be registered.

The court has said that an incomplete list is not a registry. So all gus bought at an FFL are something other than "registered" (according to the court". Perhaps "recorded"... But since they are not all recorded any list resultant to the info obtained during an FFL transfer IS meaningless on it's own in regards to who owns what firearms.

[Philadelphia]

Originally Posted by Pa. Patriot

The database is a "tool" to help trace guns used in crimes. Or at least the ia what the PSP whined and cried about when they were sued. Forget that they could not cite one single case that the database "solved".. , but I digress...

They make it available to PD's for presumably the same purpose.

Unfortunately some rogue and/or blatantly ignorant PD's use the database as a registry. (And DA's tell them to). Yes, hopefully they will be found to be liable for damages due to using the database as something clearly and specifically prohibited by law... But that's for the court to decide.




The court has said that an incomplete list is not a registry. So all gus bought at an FFL are something other than "registered" (according to the court". Perhaps "recorded"... But since they are not all recorded any list resultant to the info obtained during an FFL transfer IS meaningless on it's own in regards to who owns what firearms.

As you point out, the gov't can't have its cake and eat it too. Guns are not registered or recorded. Only specified handgun transactions are (handgun transactions excluding the statutorily exempt transfers, transfers which occurred prior to the creation of the database, and guns lawfully brought here by their lawful owners from out of state). When someone tries to use the transaction "registry" as a gun registry, they have to be reminded of this. I'd suggest it be referred to as an incomplete handgun transaction database. Nothing more.

[fritz1]

Originally Posted by Taken

I'm typically the quiet one....reading, watching, and learning from the masses.

To be honest I don't know if some of us would have faired as well as you had tonight. Either due to our (not mine) tempers, or having the wits about ourselves in such a stressful situation to reasonably discuss the laws surrounding LTCF with the 'arresting' LEO.

I admire your courage to stand up, respectfully, and be a voice for the rights of many.

You've obviously taken the time to understand the laws regarding LTCF. Its an unfortunate thing to have happen, however I'm glad it happened to YOU. Now you have the ability to educate the ignorant.

Please continue to follow through with this. For all of us.


I'm new here but see that you are well liked and respect in our community. Don't hesitate to ask if you need anything.

Please keep us informed on the events when you can.
Thank you.

I couldn't have said it better I'm a late comer on this thread, as I have been absent from here for a while busy with my other hobbies like photography,

I can say this I don't know how I would have handled it, PA Patriot is one heck of a gentleman and knows his stuff I admire him and his hobby and I will do business with him any day. pa patriot I am proud of you for your courage, your screen name speaks your character ,my best wishes to you and your family

Fritz1

[gf45acp]

Did anyone else just see WYOU's recap of news of 2008? They repeated the segment on the Dickson City. Lyndall Stoud (sp) made a statement after they showed the old footage and interview that no legal action was persued by gun owners.
Was I hearing things????????????

[Pa. Patriot]

Originally Posted by gf45acp

Did anyone else just see WYOU's recap of news of 2008? They repeated the segment on the Dickson City. Lyndall Stoud (sp) made a statement after they showed the old footage and interview that no legal action was persued by gun owners.
Was I hearing things????????????

You heard correct... I saw it too. Additionally, the segment was the one where their "legal analyst" incorrectly states you must ID yourself while carrying

Anyway, I called immediately following the segment and left a VM about the incorrect statement and to call me if they need info about the lawsuit.

I mean, geez, they didn't do any research? Just put dickson city and ocb in google and the lawsuit is in almost every result