PICS delay? PSP is violating your rights, after Sep 2nd in violation of Court Order

[Jhaydeno]

So you're syaing that the records are NOT destroyed after 72 hours?

Guess what, they enter the info from the SP4-113 into a database. If there is something incorrect or missing (that they have to see/have) a copy gets sent to the FFL for correction and return (the cover letter says to do it within 7 days or your PICS PRIVILEGES can be suspended.) At this point in time they are 16 to 18 MONTHS in arrears of getting the info inputted to the database.

Yep, not even close, those records sit in boxes for months, some times even years, before they might get destroyed. In years past, when I was in the HQ building on Elmerton Ave., there were paper records stacked & stored in the alcoves of hallways (not sure of what). If someone really wanted to push the issue, the 72 hour record destruction requirement would be a major thorn in the side of PSP. Of course they would argue the records are secure, it's doing no harm, we don't have a registry, we don't share with the feds, blah, blah, blah... The higher levels of state police management are no better than the dirtbag politicians they work with.

That might be an interesting FOIA request: how many purchase records are destroyed each year, and what is the average time before destruction?

[SevenMilePete]

But then the PSP could not continuously violate the *not a registry* registry of all firearms transactions, against the laws of this commonwealth. You know, the paperwork that is supposed to be destroyed after 72 hours*.

Don't ever tell a PSP Trooper that. I thought one was going to arrest me when I said something like, that's not really legal, is it?

[Rosco the Iroc]

Most of the times I've run checks that took a while the guys had something going on, or pendot DL computer was down.

Only once was it BS -the guy was a Sheriff's deputy.

[ShadeRabbit]

It appears that the lawsuit has failed, and the PSP can continue under-staffing PICS and farting around with background checks. Ruling was issued on Monday, apparently. I guess they could appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court???

I included some brief excerpts from the end of the ruling, I did not read it in its entirety. Too much legal mumbo-jumbo for me. Link to complete ruling below the excerpts.


"We simply cannot declare that the statute requires particular staffing or funding without adding words or mandates that the General Assembly did not include. Similarly, we cannot specify that responses must be given within a fixed amount of time, or that fees be refunded for cancelled transactions."

"Even if we were to assume one has a property right in merchandise he is only seeking to purchase, Petitioners do not allege that any eligible person has been denied approval of his application to purchase a firearm, only that the process takes, in some instances, longer than Petitioners desire. As this does not even rise to an allegation of a deprivation of a property or a liberty interest, we need not address this claim further."

https://law.justia.com/cases/pennsyl...-m-d-2022.html