SB 619 MAndatory Minimum Sentence for carry Without License

[Brick]

I see this as an anti bill and cannot recommend support of it. Partially due to the fact that the mandatory minimum sentence does not ensure prosecution of the charge to begin with. Further study of 6106 is also needed to assess other defenses or exemptions. Note also for a misdemeanor offense this becomes a disqualifier under federal law.

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA
SENATE BILL No. 619
Session of 2011

INTRODUCED BY FARNESE, TARTAGLIONE, WASHINGTON AND HUGHES, FEBRUARY 23, 2011

REFERRED TO JUDICIARY, FEBRUARY 23, 2011

AN ACT
1 Amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania
2 Consolidated Statutes, further providing for the offense of
3 carrying a firearm without a license.
4 The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
5 hereby enacts as follows:
6 Section 1. Section 6106(a) of Title 18 of the Pennsylvania
7 Consolidated Statutes is amended to read:
8 § 6106. Firearms not to be carried without a license.
9 (a) Offense defined.--
10 (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person who
11 carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a
12 firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place
13 of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and
14 lawfully issued license under this chapter commits a felony
15 of the third degree[.] and shall, upon conviction, serve a
16 mandatory minimum one-year sentence.
17 (2) A person who is otherwise eligible to possess a
18 valid license under this chapter but carries a firearm in any
1 vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or
2 about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place
3 of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license and
4 has not committed any other criminal violation commits a
5 misdemeanor of the first degree[.] and shall, upon
6 conviction, serve a mandatory minimum one-year sentence.
7 * * *
8 Section 2. This act shall take effect in 60 days.

see: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/...r=0619&pn=0628

[-JD-]

So the next non-LTCF holder who stops to pick up dinner on the way home from the range goes to prison for a year. Yea, that is protecting the population ...

Fail.

[anonymouse]

I see this as an anti bill and cannot recommend support of it. Partially due to the fact that the mandatory minimum sentence does not ensure prosecution of the charge to begin with. Further study of 6106 is also needed to assess other defenses or exemptions. Note also for a misdemeanor offense this becomes a disqualifier under federal law.

see: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/...r=0619&pn=0628

Isn't 6106(b) (the misdemeanor one) already a prohibitor, because the maximum penalty for an M1 is five years confinement?

[LorDiego01]

hapter but carries a firearm in any
1 vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or
2 about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place
3 of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license and
4 has not committed any other criminal violation commits a
5 misdemeanor of the first degree[.] and shall, upon
6 conviction, serve a mandatory minimum one-year sentence.

This is just fantastic. A non-violent, non-criminal person gets a mandatory minimum one-year sentence; while rapists, straw-purchasers, and violent assholes get a sweet plea-deal and get released right away.

What planet are these people from???

[FNG19]

So the next non-LTCF holder who stops to pick up dinner on the way home from the range goes to prison for a year.

It should be noted that this is already a violation of law. 6106(a), 6106(b)(4) and 6106(b)(8) seem relevant here. If all this bill does is up the ante for people hauling around firearms without a license and in violation of state law, I don't see the issue. I am, however, very willing to be convinced of the "gotcha" here.

[PhillyAR]

The bill does not really change anything as conviction under either paragraph is a disqualifier for ever owning guns again. However I believe that mandatory minimum sentences are not right just based on principle. In addition to that I would be against this bill just because it is anti gun period.

Maybe we should propose that our side gets something in exchange for passing this. I have always thought that the penalty for conviction under paragraph 2 is too high. If you would qualify for a LTCF but do not apply for one I don't see why carrying without it should disqualify you from ever owning guns again. That should be a summary offense IMO, or at most an M2 or M3. In PA an M1 is basically the same as felony because it is punishable by up to 5 years in prison.

[-JD-]

It should be noted that this is already a violation of law. 6106(a), 6106(b)(4) and 6106(b)(8) seem relevant here. If all this bill does is up the ante for people hauling around firearms without a license and in violation of state law, I don't see the issue. I am, however, very willing to be convinced of the "gotcha" here.

Well, let's see ...

Joe citizen in good standing, with no record is returning from the range. His Ruger MkIII is unloaded and locked in the trunk. Range bag, ammo, and targets on the back seat.

Joe calls home: "Hi honey, I'm on the way home."
Spouse: "Hey, I got home late and I've got to help Junior finish is homework. Could you swing by {Insert restaurant here} and pick up dinner?
Good spouse Joe: "Sure, no problem. See you soon .."

While exiting the restaurant parking lot, Joe/'s car is involved in a fender bender. The police arrive. While talking with Joe the officer observes the range bag and targets in the back seat.
Officer: "Sir do you have a weapon on you"
Joe: "No"
Officer - escalating (drawing?): "Sir - keep your hands where I can see them and don't make any sudden movements. I see what you have in the back seat. WHERE IS THE GUN?"
Joe (nervous, scared?): "It's locked in the trunk! I'm coming back from the range."
Officer: "Sir, let me see your carry permit."
Joe: "I don't have a carry permit. I'm not carrying a gun. It's unloaded and locked in the trunk!"
Officer: "Put you hands on the roof of the car ..."

Oh, and the DA is up for re-election and running on a tough on "gun crime" platform ...

Scenario 1 - Current law:
Judge: "Joe, stopping to pick up dinner for your family on the way back from the range was a violation of the firearms transportation laws. But I see no evidence of any intent to do anything otherwise dangerous or illegal. 1 year probation."

Scenario 2 - Mandatory minimum:
Judge: "Joe, stopping to pick up dinner for your family on the way back from the range was a violation of the firearms transportation laws. While I see no evidence of any intent to do anything otherwise dangerous or illegal, but my hands are tied. 1 year in jail."

[FNG19]

Scenario 1 - Current law:
(....)
Scenario 2 - Mandatory minimum:

Hmmm. Well, I suppose that's a possible outcome, and it's worth considering. Good point.

[bluedog46]

Do any of these D*mn policians read the constitutiona and second amendment? at least you can open carry in some states for now. I think that is crazy. Instead of handling the criminals they go after law abiding citizens. We should have a right to carry anyway instead of the crap in many states like delaware.

[Brick]

Maybe we should propose that our side gets something in exchange for passing this.

There is nothing to be gained by our support of this measure. Please be sure to read JD's explaination of why.