HB 921 PICS elimination – saving Freedom, taxpayer monies & reducing size of governme

[bigdawgbeav]

I would vote to eliminate just to save the state a few million. A call to PICS costs $2 for each FFL. I believe there were about 1 million calls to PICS last year. $2 million dollars... and it costs something like $7 million a year to run...

[fortysix]

I would vote to eliminate just to save the state a few million. A call to PICS costs $2 for each FFL. I believe there were about 1 million calls to PICS last year. $2 million dollars... and it costs something like $7 million a year to run...

Fine, if it brings in 2$, for 1m units, bringing in 2m$ per year, and costs 7m$ a year, then you trim the fat and you raise the price. If a 2$ FFL cost becomes a 5$ consumer cost, and the system requires a 5$ FFL cost (7m$ cost trimmed down to 5m$, divided over 1m consumers), then charge 8$ for the PICS check and be done with it. I do more PICS checks than most, because I buy guns frequently. But I STILL only spend about 80$ a year on PICS fees. If I have to spend 128$ instead of 80$, but keep my right to purchase firearms out of Lois Lerner's hands, then make it 300$ and be done with it. I don't want Lois Lerner EVER deciding if I'm allowed to purchase firearms. In some states, they do *PICS* checks to allow you to buy ammunition too.

If the PICS system costs 7m$, and that's too much, then clean it up. How many employees do they have? Can the task be performed with a computer? Is the data in a computer? Is it as easy as doing a database query? If $citizen isin $listofwifebeaters or isin $listofDD or isin $listoffelons then return %no, else return %yes. Oh, there's your 7m$.

[Orlov556]

Fine, if it brings in 2$, for 1m units, bringing in 2m$ per year, and costs 7m$ a year, then you trim the fat and you raise the price. If a 2$ FFL cost becomes a 5$ consumer cost, and the system requires a 5$ FFL cost (7m$ cost trimmed down to 5m$, divided over 1m consumers), then charge 8$ for the PICS check and be done with it. I do more PICS checks than most, because I buy guns frequently. But I STILL only spend about 80$ a year on PICS fees. If I have to spend 128$ instead of 80$, but keep my right to purchase firearms out of Lois Lerner's hands, then make it 300$ and be done with it. I don't want Lois Lerner EVER deciding if I'm allowed to purchase firearms. In some states, they do *PICS* checks to allow you to buy ammunition too.

If the PICS system costs 7m$, and that's too much, then clean it up. How many employees do they have? Can the task be performed with a computer? Is the data in a computer? Is it as easy as doing a database query? If $citizen isin $listofwifebeaters or isin $listofDD or isin $listoffelons then return %no, else return %yes. Oh, there's your 7m$.

Using that logic, PA can make the fee 10000 per firearm then, right? Federal law prevents any fee from being collect for NICS use. Again, i see +1 for NICS.

[bigdawgbeav]

Using that logic, PA can make the fee 10000 per firearm then, right? Federal law prevents any fee from being collect for NICS use. Again, i see +1 for NICS.

especially when PICS pretty much uses NICS anyway...

[Rblakely]

Hate to say it but I won't even look at this discussion for cost/benefit reasons. Anything that shifts power from the state level to a federal level is suspect for me.

[Orlov556]

http://www.acslpa.org/HB-921-PICS_to...CSL_Review.pdf


last post from me about this. Link is the Allegheny Sportmans Leauge's letter about why they support it. All makes perfect sense to me. Please, before you judge, give it a quick read. This would not be giving the fed power it does not already have, it would be taking away the abusive, expensive, and redundant state run system. Hope it passes!

[GunLawyer001]

http://www.acslpa.org/HB-921-PICS_to...CSL_Review.pdf


last post from me about this. Link is the Allegheny Sportmans Leauge's letter about why they support it. All makes perfect sense to me. Please, before you judge, give it a quick read. This would not be giving the fed power it does not already have, it would be taking away the abusive, expensive, and redundant state run system. Hope it passes!

Sorry, the ASL is mostly just pissed about getting their ass handed to them when they went against the PSP on the "database" issue.

"...including the, arguably, illegal ‘Record of Sale’ database system."

Don't get me wrong, that was a good fight, and they should have won. The Record of Sale Database is being used, every day, as a "registry". They're good people and that was a fight worth fighting.

But it's not worth killing PICS just to get payback for the database loss.
It's not worth handing over our gun rights to Obama's Boys to save less than a buck per Pennsylvanian per year; have you heard the foolishness of selling your birthright for a mess of pottage? This is worse. Handing approvals and denials to the same people who targeted the Tea Party, who sent guns to Mexico just to create "proof" that more control of FFL's was needed. The same people who rammed through Obamacare on strict party lines, against the will of the vast majority of self-supporting Americans. The same people who just killed off the "trust loophole".

I think the idea is insane. I think the motivation of most is a misguided belief that killing PICS is a good start on eliminating all background checks, a belief which is naive beyond belief.

Local control is almost always better than surrendering more power to Obama and the Beltway crowd. We have 50 times the influence over the Pa State Police, the Pa Governor, and the Legislature than we have over the Washington insiders who view themselves as our "rulers". I don't remember the last time a PA politician stated that he "ruled" us; they mostly understand that they're employees brought in to do a job. But in Washington, they sanctimoniously brag about how "Americans elect their rulers", not even realizing that we aren't supposed to be electing "rulers" at all, we're hiring people to run some basic Constitutional functions.

You may want to place your gun rights in the hands of a crooked Chicago politician with a history of deception and hatred for gun owners. I think it's a horrible mistake, and much like the NFA gun trust issue, I'd prefer not to be in a position to tell you "I told you so" in a year or two.

[chiltech500]

I have changed my mind after intially thinking using the NICS was a good idea after reading all your thoughts.

I'd rather we keep things as fragmented and difficult to utilize as possible

This gentleman was referring to the idea that it's better to make a dismantling of our rights as complicated as possible, and he's right. If all our eggs were in the fed. basket, we would have to reconstruct a PICS to replace some potential godawful federal changes.

If I got anything out of this, email and call our representatives to keep the pro rights in their face to offset all the anti's.

I wish I could set up an automatic emailer to periodically email semi-personalized letters to our legislators.

[knight0334]

There is good and bad with eliminating PICS in favor of NICS.

Prior to NICS integrating the state prohibitors, PA using NICS would legally be impossible. But now that NICS host's PA's 6015 prohibitors - it is possible.

However, dealing with Harrisburg is much easier than dealing with Clarksburg WV(even though Clarksburg is probably closer to me).

NICS challenges can take months to get straightened out. One of my best friends in FL had a 6 month wait to get cleared for an improper denial. However most of the PICS denial challenges I've helped people with, including my own, were less than 2 weeks, with a handful taking upto a month.

Now, NICS does have a nice feature to get false flags fixed that PICS doesn't seem to have, or have working properly.

One bad thing with going from PICS to NICS is - prior PICS challenge reversals may not be in the NICS system, and you would likely have to do it all over again on the NICS timeframe.

Until NICS hosts and has attached all of PICS's challenge reversals - I wont mind paying the $5 per transfer to PICS to do the work. ...and it also helps keep a few Pennsylvanians employed.

[mingomom]

Thanks for outlining the pros and cons. It's been helpful in deciding which way to go on this issue.