Confiscated handgun questions

[username1]

Hi all, hope you can help as I searched and could not find a thread relating to my issue. 6 years ago I drove through a DUI checkpoint while I had a loaded handgun in my vehicle. It was legally purchased but I did not have LTCF. So I ended up pleading guilty on the DUI and the M1 charge of Firearm Not To Be Carried W/O License-No Crim Viol.

I was looking into buying a gun and from your forum I came across 6105(f)(4) which states I should have been given a receipt and that "the appropriate law enforcement agency shall be liable to the lawful owner of said confiscated, seized or relinquished firearm for any loss, damage or substantial decrease in value of said firearm that is a direct result of a lack of reasonable care by the appropriate law enforcement agency."

So my questions are:

Is there a standard recourse for not receiving a receipt?

Am I interpretating this correctly that I should have gotten my gun back after the trial?

Have any of you attempted to get back a confiscated gun and care to share the route you went?

My last question is would this be worth the time/ effort/ possible lawyer for a gun that I think I paid $400 for?

I realize the last question is highly subjective as the worth to what my time, energy and seeing that everything was legally followed might vary from your views but I welcome all advice.

[GunLawyer001]

Any M1 conviction means that you can't own or possess any gun. Getting that gun back is the least of your problems.

[username1]

Any M1 conviction means that you can't own or possess any gun. Getting that gun back is the least of your problems.

I appreciate your quick response. Searching around it seems I overlooked the part where Federal law kicks in and say I can't own one. Thanks for the reply

[dsnover]

Realizing that I'm preaching to the choir, nonetheless.....

It seems ludicrous to me that we have a Pennsylvania Constitution that specifically enumerates the right of citizens to bear arms in defense of self and state (section 21), and that further in the state constitution, that right (and others) are deemed so basic and fundamental so as to be 'excepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate.'

And yet, here we are, where failure to have a license (which shouldn't be required) causes an M1, which is a prohibiting offense.

I am not versed in the Law, nor have I researched this, but it would seem to me that if such are charge were levied upon a person of financial power, that a reasonable outcome would be to strike any legislation that is at odds with Section 21.

And then I wonder why this hasn't happened. Is it that only persons who can't afford to fight have been thusly afflicted? (that's my suspicion)

We speak of 'Constitutional Carry' legislation, which although I support, part of me says it isn't required to get the legislature involved, only to challenge the constitutionality of the laws that impede what was supposed to be an 'inviolate' right of a free Pennsylvanian.

To the OP: I sincerely feel sad for you. While I have little sympathy for the DUI, that is an entirely separate issue from pleading to an M1 that forever prohibits you from defending yourself with a firearm. The unfortunate part is that short of copious amounts of money being applied to one or more lawyers (and with little to no chance of success), there is no way to reverse the damage inflicted. If you are a person of financial means, what I'd love to see is a challenge on constitutional grounds to the M1, for success in that area would be a victory for all. (yeah, pie-in-the-sky)

[BimmerJon]

Sorry OP. You'll never touch a gun again

[GunLawyer001]

Sorry OP. You'll never touch a gun again

Well, he would need a pardon, and I've been successful in obtaining some pardons for people who had prohibiting criminal convictions. He should wait another 4 years or so from the date of the conviction, and there are a number of other factors as well.

It's not easy to get a pardon, but neither do you need to be a campaign contributor to the Governor. We hear a lot about rich or connected people getting Presidential pardons (always from Democratic presidents, for some reason), but I'm happy to say that Pennsylvania's system of pardons has honor and integrity and a bit of heart to it.

[stimrob]

I've always wondered, in situations like this where the OP is now a "prohibited person".

If the OP had more guns at home (say a shotgun and a rifle), do the police/ATF swoop in , search the house and take all other firearms in the home that were purchased in his name?

I hope not, but if the OP is a prohibited person, they cannot legally sell/transfer it to someone else, right? So what happens to the rest of the firearms you might own?

[knight0334]

I've always wondered, in situations like this where the OP is now a "prohibited person".

If the OP had more guns at home (say a shotgun and a rifle), do the police/ATF swoop in , search the house and take all other firearms in the home that were purchased in his name?

I hope not, but if the OP is a prohibited person, they cannot legally sell/transfer it to someone else, right? So what happens to the rest of the firearms you might own?

After becoming a prohibited person you have 60day by PA law to get rid of the guns. I don't remember if federal law gave you a grace period.

After those 60days are up - if you are a prohibited person, you are legally F'd if you have control and custody of a gun. Since you cannot possess a gun, you cannot transfer it after the 60 days.

Generally the police/ATF/who-ever don't come sweep your house. Your probation/parole officer might, but the others dont. Sometimes LEO's will if there has been a PFA issued against you.

[stimrob]

Thanks knight, I appreciate taking the time to respond. Makes sense.

[GunLawyer001]

After becoming a prohibited person you have 60day by PA law to get rid of the guns. I don't remember if federal law gave you a grace period.

After those 60days are up - if you are a prohibited person, you are legally F'd if you have control and custody of a gun. Since you cannot possess a gun, you cannot transfer it after the 60 days.

Generally the police/ATF/who-ever don't come sweep your house. Your probation/parole officer might, but the others dont. Sometimes LEO's will if there has been a PFA issued against you.

This is actually a problem, that too many people who can no longer pass PICS believe that this means that they can't buy any MORE guns, but they can keep what they have; because "nobody told me" that they were now prohibited (which is probably true, but legally irrelevant).

In fact, any interested LEO could check the Record of Sale Database, notice that 1 or more firearms appear to have last been transferred to the now-prohibited person, and that would probably be enough to justify a warrant (despite the inaccuracy of the Database).

More commonly, a prohibited person in possession of a firearm comes to the attention of police after he defends his home, or his wife/girlfriend becomes an embittered ex who dimes him out, or there's a fire and firemen stumble across his guns, or the police are called for some other reason. And then you're screwed, your lawyer is unlikely to be able to get you a pardon for the original prohibiting conviction AND the new crime of being a prohibited person in possession.