Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/20/2004 5:08:43 AM EST
www.cumberlink.com/articles/2004/10/20/breaking_news/story07.txt


Breaking News



Court upholds state police gun purchase record-keeping

By The Associated Press





PITTSBURGH -- A state police database of handgun sales is not an illegal registry of firearm ownership, the state Supreme Court ruled Tuesday, turning away arguments by sportsmen who have challenged the database for four years.

The high court, in a 3-2 ruling, rejected arguments that the state police database violates the state's 1995 Uniform Firearms Act. The ruling upholds a Commonwealth Court judge's ruling in 2001.

Gun owners and sportsmen sued in 2000, maintaining that the computer database constitutes an illegal registry of firearms ownership.

Specifically, the lawsuit claimed that the information state police glean from handgun purchases violates the 1995 law that bars police from maintaining a registry of firearms ownership. The sportsmen also contended that the practice violates a 1997 law that requires state police to destroy certain gun-sale records within 72 hours, following a criminal record check.

Data from the purchase forms -- the buyer's name, date of birth, Social Security number, the date of sale, the identity of the dealer, and the serial number, make and caliber of the handgun -- are entered into a computer database that also contains criminal history information and is shared with local police.

Writing for the majority, Justice Ronald D. Castille found that the database of sales was not tantamount to an ownership registry.

"Although the database may be a registry, it is not a registry of firearm ownership ... The database does not maintain a record of all firearms owned by Pennsylvanians, which would include long guns (shotguns and rifles), or firearms that are owned by Pennsylvanians, but not purchased in the Commonwealth," Castille wrote.

State police said the provision requiring records to be destroyed within three days is intended to apply only to "long-gun" purchases, and only when the state's electronic instant background checking system breaks down for more than 48 hours. The state has kept records of handgun purchases since 1931, and it has been a state police responsibility since 1943.

In a dissent, Justices Russell M. Nigro and Sandra Schultz Newman, said the database did rise to an illegal registry of gun owners.

"Even though the database at issue here does not include every person in Pennsylvania who owns a handgun ... it nevertheless violates (state law) by keeping a partial record of handgun ownership insofar as it records those persons who either own or used to own a handgun that they purchased," Nigro wrote.

Justices Thomas Saylor and William H. Lamb, who left the bench in January, did not take part in the ruling.

The lawsuit and appeal were filed by the Allegheny County Sportsmen's League, the Lehigh Valley Firearms Coalition and four individual plaintiffs.

Michael Slavonic, a board member of the Allegheny County Sportsmen's League, said he was disappointed.

"We think we fought the good fight and I guess the situation is that right now that we have a definitive opinion from the court and we will have to look toward the Legislature for a remedy," Slavonic said.

Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:14:14 AM EST
What bullshit from the judge tht wrote the opinion.

"Although the database may be a registry, it is not a registry of firearm ownership ...
Lets see it includes the owners name, the type and cal of handgun who it was bought from and a some more info. Yet it;s not a registry because it doesn't include all guns. What fucking bullshit.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:16:52 AM EST
Back to the legislature.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:17:00 AM EST

Originally Posted By photoman:
What bullshit from the judge tht wrote the opinion.

"Although the database may be a registry, it is not a registry of firearm ownership ...
Lets see it includes the owners name, the type and cal of handgun who it was bought from and a some more info. Yet it;s not a registry because it doesn't include all guns. What fucking bullshit.





yeah,that's the 1st thing I noticed too.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:17:14 AM EST
Since virtually every database has some errors or omissions, no registry could ever be considered a registry of gun owners under the Court's analysis. Interesting.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:20:42 AM EST
Thanks for the update, T-J,
I had been wondering what was going on with this.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:30:22 AM EST

Originally Posted By FLAL1A:
Back to the legislature.



Can this be appealled to the
Supremes? Maybe on 2nd or
4th amendment grounds?
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:37:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By TheCynic:

Originally Posted By FLAL1A:
Back to the legislature.



Can this be appealled to the
Supremes? Maybe on 2nd or
4th amendment grounds?



No. Lots of states have gun registries. Technically, a gun registry is not an infringement on your right to keep and bear arms. Not until they used it to confiscate your guns anyway.

Michigan has had a handgun registry for about 70 years. I don't like it, but I'm not overly concerned.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:38:21 AM EST
Gotta dump Rendell 1st........
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:47:37 AM EST
One more step...and this will no doubt spawn the same thing in other states as well.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 5:48:19 AM EST

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By TheCynic:

Originally Posted By FLAL1A:
Back to the legislature.



Can this be appealled to the
Supremes? Maybe on 2nd or
4th amendment grounds?



No. Lots of states have gun registries. Technically, a gun registry is not an infringement on your right to keep and bear arms. Not until they used it to confiscate your guns anyway.

Michigan has had a handgun registry for about 70 years. I don't like it, but I'm not overly concerned.



Well from what the judge says it sounds like the only reason they decided it wasn't illegal was because it didn't include long guns as well, and that had it included long guns it would have been illegal. Besides that, registries only have one end use at all and that IS for confiscation reasons.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 10:51:13 AM EST
Bummer.

You guys in PA should move.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 10:54:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
Bummer.

You guys in PA should move.



OMG all you guys in PAifornistan should just move!
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 10:55:43 AM EST
Kalifornia used it's gun registry for confiscation, right?

Link Posted: 10/20/2004 10:56:04 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
Bummer.

You guys in PA should move.


Link Posted: 10/20/2004 10:59:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By Palo_Duro:
Kalifornia used it's gun registry for confiscation, right?




No, but its a popular internet myth.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 11:06:17 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By Palo_Duro:
Kalifornia used it's gun registry for confiscation, right?




No, but its a popular internet myth.



Thanks, I wasn't sure.

Link Posted: 10/20/2004 11:12:55 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By Palo_Duro:
Kalifornia used it's gun registry for confiscation, right?




No, but its a popular internet myth.



Huh. I thought that people who had registerd SKS's with detachable box magazines recieved letters from the state informing them that if they did not surrender their weapons to the police, they would become instant felons.

That what the NRA said in their infomercial during the last election.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 11:25:34 AM EST
PA is still a great place to live as far a 2A rights go, compared to other states. Even Tom Ridge refused to destroy records of firearms transactions. This has been going on for a long time in PA.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 11:29:45 AM EST

Originally Posted By motown_steve:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By Palo_Duro:
Kalifornia used it's gun registry for confiscation, right?




No, but its a popular internet myth.



Huh. I thought that people who had registerd SKS's with detachable box magazines recieved letters from the state informing them that if they did not surrender their weapons to the police, they would become instant felons.

That what the NRA said in their infomercial during the last election.



They recieved letters stating the rifles were illegal in Cali, and they could not longer possess them here. they could sell them to someone out of state, store them out of state, sell them to a licensed AW dealer, deactivate them, convert them to a non prohibited configuration, or sell them to the state (surrender them for destruction, with $$$ compesation). That's not really "confiscation."
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 11:30:22 AM EST
That's what you get when you elect Rendell.

GunLvr
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 11:30:54 AM EST

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Huh. I thought that people who had registerd SKS's with detachable box magazines recieved letters from the state informing them that if they did not surrender their weapons to the police, they would become instant felons.

That what the NRA said in their infomercial during the last election.



That was my impression as well.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 11:31:10 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By Palo_Duro:
Kalifornia used it's gun registry for confiscation, right?




No, but its a popular internet myth.



NY does. If a person owns handguns, and they die, the sheriff's knock on your door for them to be held until someone with a permit can come pick them up, even before the body has cooled down.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 11:32:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
Huh. I thought that people who had registerd SKS's with detachable box magazines recieved letters from the state informing them that if they did not surrender their weapons to the police, they would become instant felons.

That what the NRA said in their infomercial during the last election.



That was my impression as well.



They ahd like 90 days to get rid of them or turn them in.

Who knows how efective that was.I saw the signs in Turners and other gun stores, too; just like the SB23 campaign. Only dumbfucks like me registered their ARs
Top Top