Senate Bill 1299 - Covering the Police Depts?

[Brick]

I can't figure out the need for this proposed law.


PRINTER'S NO. 1804


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SENATE BILL
No. 1299 Session of 2008


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


INTRODUCED BY KASUNIC, COSTA, STACK, FONTANA, STOUT, LAVALLE,
LOGAN, BAKER, EICHELBERGER, FOLMER, TARTAGLIONE AND WOZNIAK,
MARCH 7, 2008


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFERRED TO JUDICIARY, MARCH 7, 2008


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AN ACT

1 Amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania
2 Consolidated Statutes, further providing for sale or transfer
3 of firearms.

4 The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
5 hereby enacts as follows:
6 Section 1. Section 6111(j) of Title 18 of the Pennsylvania
7 Consolidated Statutes is amended to read:
8 § 6111. Sale or transfer of firearms.
9 * * *
10 (j) Exemption.--
11 (1) The provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall not
12 apply to sales between Federal firearms licensees.
13 (2) The provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall not
14 apply to sales and transfers between a law enforcement agency
15 and a Federal firearms licensee provided the weapon is
16 acquired for duty purposes. The Pennsylvania State Police
17 shall promulgate regulations to establish procedures to
18 ensure compliance with this paragraph.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Section 2. This act shall take effect in 60 days.

[ChamberedRound]

Looks the same as this House Bill:

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/pennsylva...hb-2229-a.html

In short, it seems they want to exempt LEO firearms transactions from being entered into the sales database. Which IMHO just proves that this "database" is being used as a registry unconstitutionally. And, if it's not really a registry, then why do their purchases need to be exempted from it?

[Philadelphia]

Looks the same as this House Bill:

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/pennsylva...hb-2229-a.html

In short, it seems they want to exempt LEO firearms transactions from being entered into the sales database. Which IMHO just proves that this "database" is being used as a registry unconstitutionally. And, if it's not really a registry, then why do their purchases need to be exempted from it?

Would render duty guns much less easily trace-able by serial number. Do LEOs really want that? I'd tend to doubt it. But it might save a lot of paperwork for a dept. buy (like a lot of guns at once).

[ChamberedRound]

Would render duty guns much less easily trace-able by serial number. Do LEOs really want that? I'd tend to doubt it. But it might save a lot of paperwork for a dept. buy (like a lot of guns at once).

I personally could care less about the police's reasons for wanting it. If we have to go through the paperwork, then they should too. As I said in the post I referenced above, if anything the government should be under MORE scrutiny than the people, not LESS. If we as citizens, because we're too lazy or uninterested, keep giving up our freedoms to the government, one of these days we're going to find that they will grossly abuse the power we shouldn't have given them in the first place.

[Brick]

Geez I still dont' get it. Why shouldn't departmental purchases require some sort of safeguards? PD firearms should be included in the "sales" database. To not do so is just stupid. How else could a PD pistol be traced if lost or stolen? This law is about bulk purchases by a department, not individual purchases by an LEO. I hope that the department is buying based on competetive bids and dealing at a higher level than the retail dealer.