Current firearms bills in PA General Assembly

[The Unknown 1087]

This is going to be an unpopular opinion. But....

I’ve done EMS for 12 years and have interacted with a lot psych patients. Some of those people do need reported and shouldn’t be able to purchase guns.

One of our frequent flyers comes to mind. That fuck is crazy. Like “the bubbles in my soda told me to light th shed on fire!” And then fight with us going to the hospital. He was never 302’d. Because they offered him a 201 instead. Then had him again going crazy and laying in the middle of the street. Again. Was given a 201. Had other issues, he was able to buy a shot gun, he was taken to the hospital for an evaluation and leave because he knows the system. He got charged with a summary for making threats about using the shot gun but that’s it.

Some of that stuff does indeed to change. That’s my opinion.

[Walleye Hunter]

This is going to be an unpopular opinion. But....

I’ve done EMS for 12 years and have interacted with a lot psych patients. Some of those people do need reported and shouldn’t be able to purchase guns.

One of our frequent flyers comes to mind. That fuck is crazy. Like “the bubbles in my soda told me to light th shed on fire!” And then fight with us going to the hospital. He was never 302’d. Because they offered him a 201 instead. Then had him again going crazy and laying in the middle of the street. Again. Was given a 201. Had other issues, he was able to buy a shot gun, he was taken to the hospital for an evaluation and leave because he knows the system. He got charged with a summary for making threats about using the shot gun but that’s it.

Some of that stuff does indeed to change. That’s my opinion.

For me the issue isn't preventing those who shouldn't have guns from having them, it's the bogus call to the authorities that gets my house searched and my guns taken away until I prove it shouldn't have happened in the first place. Then on top of it there is usually no penalty for the individual who got me swatted.

[The Unknown 1087]

For me the issue isn't preventing those who shouldn't have guns from having them, it's the bogus call to the authorities that gets my house searched and my guns taken away until I prove it shouldn't have happened in the first place. Then on top of it there is usually no penalty for the individual who got me swatted.

That’s true and they should figure something out ahead of time instead of passing it first and figuring it out later.

Some cases though like I posted, those could be verified and they absolutely shouldn’t have one lol

[Brick]

For me the issue isn't preventing those who shouldn't have guns from having them, it's the bogus call to the authorities that gets my house searched and my guns taken away until I prove it shouldn't have happened in the first place. Then on top of it there is usually no penalty for the individual who got me swatted.

True only if your LEOs are lazy and refuse to enforce the law. This is from Title 18

§ 4906. False reports to law enforcement authorities.
(a) Falsely incriminating another.--Except as provided in subsection (c), a person who knowingly gives false information to any law enforcement officer with intent to implicate another commits a misdemeanor of the second degree.
(b) Fictitious reports.--Except as provided in subsection (c), a person commits a misdemeanor of the third degree if he:
(1) reports to law enforcement authorities an offense or other incident within their concern knowing that it did not occur; or
(2) pretends to furnish such authorities with information relating to an offense or incident when he knows he has no information relating to such offense or incident.
(c) Grading.--
(1) If the violation of subsection (a) or (b) occurs during a declared state of emergency and the false report causes the resources of the law enforcement authority to be diverted from dealing with the declared state of emergency, the offense shall be graded one step greater than that set forth in the applicable subsection.
(2) If the violation of subsection (a) or (b) relates to a false report of the theft or loss of a firearm, as defined in section 5515 (relating to prohibiting of paramilitary training), the offense shall be graded one step greater than that set forth in the applicable subsection.

(June 28, 2002, P.L.481, No.82, eff. 60 days; Oct. 17, 2008, P.L.1628, No.131, eff. 60 days)

2008 Amendment. Act 131 amended subsec. (c).
Cross References. Section 4906 is referred to in sections 2709, 2709.1, 6105 of this title; section 6106 of Title 23 (Domestic Relations); sections 5552, 62A05 of Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure).

[Berncly]

That’s true and they should figure something out ahead of time instead of passing it first and figuring it out later.

Some cases though like I posted, those could be verified and they absolutely shouldn’t have one lol

Respectfully.

The issue with what you posted is not to make it easier to ban someone from owning a gun.
The issue is why the 302 wasn't utilized with multiple opportunities to do so.

We already have numerous ways to ban someone from owning a gun.
How about not reducing charges and ending revolving door justice that puts violent criminals back on the street.
How about using the 302 as intended instead of letting your crazy guy continue to threaten people.

But existing gun laws and existing mental health restrictions don't get utilized, and then you say we should make it easier to ban someone from owning a gun?
If you think easing arbitrary gun bans will not be weaponized against you, I have some beachfront property in Nevada to sell you.

Don't believe me?
Go to California or Jersey and take a look around.
-

[KPShooting]

This is going to be an unpopular opinion. But....

I’ve done EMS for 12 years and have interacted with a lot psych patients. Some of those people do need reported and shouldn’t be able to purchase guns.

One of our frequent flyers comes to mind. That fuck is crazy. Like “the bubbles in my soda told me to light th shed on fire!” And then fight with us going to the hospital. He was never 302’d. Because they offered him a 201 instead. Then had him again going crazy and laying in the middle of the street. Again. Was given a 201. Had other issues, he was able to buy a shot gun, he was taken to the hospital for an evaluation and leave because he knows the system. He got charged with a summary for making threats about using the shot gun but that’s it.

Some of that stuff does indeed to change. That’s my opinion.

Yeah they need to reopen the state mental institutions. There's no where for those people to go aside from prison so they just keep getting released back into the general public.

[The Unknown 1087]

Respectfully.

The issue with what you posted is not to make it easier to ban someone from owning a gun.
The issue is why the 302 wasn't utilized with multiple opportunities to do so.

We already have numerous ways to ban someone from owning a gun.
How about not reducing charges and ending revolving door justice that puts violent criminals back on the street.
How about using the 302 as intended instead of letting your crazy guy continue to threaten people.

But existing gun laws and existing mental health restrictions don't get utilized, and then you say we should make it easier to ban someone from owning a gun?
If you think easing arbitrary gun bans will not be weaponized against you, I have some beachfront property in Nevada to sell you.

Don't believe me?
Go to California or Jersey and take a look around.
-

They should have used a 302 multiple times but they didn’t. People that are qualified, like public safety should absolutely be able to report their ass for good cause to stop them from going to a store and buying a firearm. If not, then guess what? “Crazy guy bought pistol legally and murdered x amount of people”. It just looks bad for the rest of the sane gun owners later.

[ett]

They should have used a 302 multiple times but they didn’t. People that are qualified, like public safety should absolutely be able to report their ass for good cause to stop them from going to a store and buying a firearm. If not, then guess what? “Crazy guy bought pistol legally and murdered x amount of people”. It just looks bad for the rest of the sane gun owners later.

No; Berncly had it correct.
Stop the issue at it's source. Get these "crazy" people 302'd and off the streets.
Do NOT infringe upon the Rights of others.

[Berncly]

They should have used a 302 multiple times but they didn’t. People that are qualified, like public safety should absolutely be able to report their ass for good cause to stop them from going to a store and buying a firearm. If not, then guess what? “Crazy guy bought pistol legally and murdered x amount of people”. It just looks bad for the rest of the sane gun owners later.

Again, respectfully.

Define "crazy".
Define "good cause".

With a 302 there is a process that requires legal oversight.
Without a 302 and just "reporting" you get people accusing you of being crazy for voting for Trump.

Liberal Democrats are the most unhinged people I have ever seen in our country during my lifetime.
They say you're a racist for calling ISIS murderers terrorists, and then they call you a terrorist for being a member of the NRA.

You want to give those people the ability to "report" and ban you from owning a gun with no due process?
They just pushed through "red flag" laws in multiple states, and already they are knocking down doors and killing people who have not done anything except own a gun.

You want to give people that are ok with murdering you on a nonviolent technicality more power to strip you of your rights?
In less than one Liberal Democrat administration they will have used their discretion to effectively ban 90% of the population from owning guns.

The process to ban a dangerous crazy person from owning a gun already exists, it is the 302.
It should be utilized instead of creating easier ways to strip people of their Constitutional rights without due process.
-

[Dsparil]

It surprises me that there are some people on this board who think that some of this is ok.