For those who want to replace PICS with NICS....

[Bang]

If I am recalling correctly, originally there was a three-day waiting period to go out the door with a handgun, and there was an exception for LTCF holders...they could buy, receive and go. The installation of the instant check allowed purchasers who passed to receive immediately. The LTCF exception was dropped, since they had to submit to the same scrutiny in like manner.

[GunLawyer001]

And that's the issue. I'm fine with PICS, except they refuse to follow the law and destroy the sales record as required. . . .

The PA Supreme Court looked at this question, and they read the subsection carefully, and unfortunately, the subsection supports the PSP on this.

Yes, they have to destroy certain records.

No, it's not the usual Record of Sale form used for "firearms".

It's for when the system crashes and dealers mail in the "handgun form" before a sale of a long gun, not "firearms" as defined by barrel length and overall length.

They have to destroy records collected pursuant to subsection 1.1. The only records collected under 1.1 effectively relate to long guns. There's no Record of Sale database for long guns, so no violation of the statute as written.

Here, read it yourself (I added coloring):

(1.1) On the date of publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin of a notice by the Pennsylvania State Police that the instantaneous records check has been implemented, all of the following shall apply:

(i) In the event of an electronic failure under section 6111.1(b)(2) (relating to Pennsylvania State Police) for purposes of a firearm which exceeds the barrel and related lengths set forth in section 6102, obtained a completed application/record of sale from the potential buyer or transferee to be filled out in triplicate, the original copy to be sent to the Pennsylvania State Police, postmarked via first class mail, within 14 days of sale, one copy to be retained by the licensed importer, licensed manufacturer or licensed dealer for a period of 20 years and one copy to be provided to the purchaser or transferee.

(ii) The form of the application/record of sale shall be no more than one page in length and shall be promulgated by the Pennsylvania State Police and provided by the licensed importer, licensed manufacturer or licensed dealer.

(iii) For purposes of conducting the criminal history, juvenile delinquency and mental health records background check which shall be completed within ten days of receipt of the information from the dealer, the application/record of sale shall include the name, address, birthdate, gender, race, physical description and Social Security number of the purchaser or transferee and the date of application.

(iv) No information regarding the type of firearm need be included other than an indication that the firearm exceeds the barrel lengths set forth in section 6102.

(v) Unless it has been discovered pursuant to a criminal history, juvenile delinquency and mental health records background check that the potential purchaser or transferee is prohibited from possessing a firearm pursuant to section 6105 (relating to persons not to possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms), no information on the application/record of sale provided pursuant to this subsection shall be retained as precluded by section 6111.4 (relating to registration of firearms) by the Pennsylvania State Police either through retention of the application/record of sale or by entering the information onto a computer, and, further, an application/record of sale received by the Pennsylvania State Police pursuant to this subsection shall be destroyed within 72 hours of the completion of the criminal history, juvenile delinquency and mental health records background check.

[gghbi]

If I am recalling correctly, originally there was a three-day waiting period to go out the door with a handgun, and there was an exception for LTCF holders...they could buy, receive and go. The installation of the instant check allowed purchasers who passed to receive immediately. The LTCF exception was dropped, since they had to submit to the same scrutiny in like manner.

Yes, that was the case for a while back in the day.

[gnbrotz]

I would say that's a problem that should be resolved at the federal level. Personally, I'd rather not put more control of our already severely limited rights in the hands of the feds, especially after the recent obvious corruption of the FBI.

I agree. I'm sure at the time of passage, and no doubt with an NRA push, this "compromise" on our behalf was a big deal. Yet the reality is that it currently only applies to half the states, and a quick look at states that I think of as "good" in regards to gun laws don't qualifiy for the exception. States like NH, VT, TN, and VA.

[Gunsnwater]

I'm in the PICS camp. I'm not very good at predictions but I don't ever see the ROS going away whether we have PICS or NICS.

I use to think that way about the Pa helmet law, now I believe we can effect change with enough effort.

[Mike_Golf]

I would say that's a problem that should be resolved at the federal level. Personally, I'd rather not put more control of our already severely limited rights in the hands of the feds, especially after the recent obvious corruption of the FBI.

Is that what it takes? A change in the federal law?

[knight0334]

And that's the issue. I'm fine with PICS, except they refuse to follow the law and destroy the sales record as required. Our reps refuses to hold them responsible.
So why should I continue to support one more dysfunctional layer of government that uses its power to keep track of who owns firearms, and continues allow law enforcement to use it as a tool for confiscation?

That is why we need to deal with that directly with legislative action to strike the requirement of a Record of Sale SP4-113 form.

Then, also use that same legislative action to move the costs of PICS from the buyer to the General Fund. ....since it "benefits" all residents of the state to make sure prohibited persons aren't buying from a FFL. (we all know they will buy elsewhere)

[hog45]

How about we replace them both with nothing?

[ett]

How about we replace them both with nothing?

And THAT is what we should be pushing for.

[tl_3237]

The federal exemption requires that the LTCF/CCW was issued pursuant to passing NICS. Since our overlords use PICS *instead of* NICS, our LTCF isn't "good enough" to pass federal muster.

27 CFR 478.102 - Sales or deliveries of firearms on and after November 30, 1998.

(d)Exceptions to NICS check. The provisions of paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply if -

(1) The transferee has presented to the licensee a valid permit or license that -

(i) Allows the transferee to possess, acquire, or carry a firearm;

(ii) Was issued not more than 5 years earlier by the State in which the transfer is to take place; and

(iii) The law of the State provides that such a permit or license is to be issued only after an authorized government official has verified that the information available to such official does not indicate that possession of a firearm by the transferee would be in violation of Federal, State, or local law: Provided, That on and after November 30, 1998, the information available to such official includes the NICS;

(2) The firearm is subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act and has been approved for transfer under 27 CFR part 479; or

(3) On application of the licensee, in accordance with the provisions of § 478.150, the Director has certified that compliance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section is impracticabl

Since PICS does access NICS I would think that the LTCF would qualify for the exemption of 18 USC 922(t) at the Federal level EXCEPT for the fact that Pa statutes require a background check (18 Pa CS 6111) - it is Pa that prevents us from using the Federal exemption. Of the eleven other states that act as a Point_of_Contact for all firearm transactions, similar to Pa, at least three also qualify for the 922(t) exemption (Hawaii, Nevada, Utah).

ref:https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regula...y-permit-chart