Monday, April 29, 2013

Americans Overwhelmingly Support Gun Background Checks

65%. In view of the recent tragedies in Colorado and Connecticut, I'm surprised it's not even higher. But locally, one gun rights attorney claims Sheriffs have no authority to check references on a state-supplied form.

Under Pennsylvania law, the Sheriff shall conduct the following investigations when reviewing a LTCF application:
(1) investigate the applicant's record of criminal conviction;
(2) investigate whether or not the applicant is under indictment for or has ever been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment exceeding one year;
(3) investigate whether the applicant's character and reputation are such that the applicant will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety;
(4) investigate whether the applicant would be precluded from receiving a license under subsection (e)(1) or section 6105(h) (relating to persons not to possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms); and
(5) conduct a criminal background, juvenile delinquency and mental health check following the procedures set forth in section 6111 (relating to sale or transfer of firearms), receive a unique approval number for that inquiry and record the date and number on the application.
Preventing a Sheriff from checking references makes it impossible to determine whether an applicant presents a danger to public safety.

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Blame the stupid politicians in Harrisburg, they have a history of fucking up everything that is a no brainer...

Anonymous said...

Polls show the same percent of respondents say they believe in ghosts. People are stupid. PSP was caught keeping lists of gun owners. A deputy in NorCo recently betrayed public trust re: an application. Background checks would have had no impact on the recent mass shootings. The obsession with lists of lawful gun owners is what makes some people very suspicious of our government. Enforce current laws. Stop dreaming up new ones that have nothing to do with gun crime or the recent tragedies.

Anonymous said...

The PA law also says: "Upon the receipt of an application for a license to carry a firearm, the sheriff shall, within 45 days, issue or refuse to issue a license on the basis of the investigation under subsection (d) and the accuracy of the information contained in the application."

So the accuracy of the information contained in the application is part of the approval process. The application asks for two character references. How can the accuracy of this information be checked without contacting the applicant's references?

Anonymous said...

Your hypothesis that preventing a sheriff from making reference checks makes it impossible to determine if a person is a danger to society is BOGUS. If I am potential killer I would likely list a couple of crazy friends or nutty relatives to provide me with a positive reference. So what will it prove to call them? You are not required to list ANY references. So what is your point?

Bernie O'Hare said...

Actually, I know someone who is so nuts that she listed two references who would have told the Sheriff not to issu a LTCF.

Anonymous said...

Bernie
I think you are confusing your facts a bit. A LTCF application has NOTHING to do with the universal background checks for fire arm purchases. You are misleading readers by linking the two very different issues. A LTCF permit and the Sheriff's offices obligation to follow up on references is not related to a background check for the purchase of a fire arm from a dealer.

Bernie O'Hare said...

You are correct. I am linking the two. American who overwhelmingly support background checks would also want Sheriffs to check references on LTCF applications. I have not misled my readers, and presume they are just as intelligent as you.

Anonymous said...

Is this like...

An overwhelming silent majority want to sell Gracedale or An overwhelming amount of people in Bethlehem want a single hauler for trash or an overwhelming amount of people think John Stoffa is a nice guy. What can we believe from this blog these days.

Bernie O'Hare said...

I never claimed that an overwhelming majority of people want to sell Gracedale or want single trash hauler in Bethlehem. Rather than dealing with my arguments, you'd prefer to attack me. I wonder who you are. But not too much. Go back to what you do best, rolling on the floor and foaming at the mouth.

Anonymous said...

I take it Ms. Mezzacappa still has her pistol permit

Bernie O'Hare said...

I believe it has been revoked.

Anonymous said...

So get it together Bernie. Don't have a post with a title about "Americans supporting background checks" and then write an article about LTCf permits, when you really want to talk about Messacrappa's bogus application. And I agrees, she shouldn't have a permit.

Bernie O'Hare said...

The whole point, and I should not have to spell this out, is that Americans may not want assault rifle bans, but they do want more investigations into the people who want guns.

Anonymous said...

There is a difference between a proposed federal law being adopted and a state law that is on the books that The Northampton county sheriff does not enforce.

Bernie O'Hare said...

In both cases, most Americans want more investigations, not less.

Anonymous said...

Calling bullshit. Americans give Congress 11% approval; then, re-elect their Congressional representative at rates exceeding 95%. Most American (including our President) don't know the difference between so-called assault weapons and a Bushmaster carbine. Polls assume knowledge and honesty. We know what happens when we assume.

Anonymous said...

Can you buy a firearm in Pennsylvania with-out a background check?

Anonymous said...

As a gun owner and a permit holder of LTCF liscense. I support universal background checks. It seems like a common sense approach to a real problem. However, I am not sure how much effect it would have on murders and large scale attacks. Disturbed individuals will always have an opportunity to due harm. Regardless of access to firearms.

Anonymous said...

I find the "reference" part troublesome. I think one day it will be successfully challanged and dropped. Frankly, it is meaningless. If this woman had named two people who would say she is great(please no stupid jokes, she could do that) she would have had no problem. The part of the application that matters is the crimminal history, mental health record.

You can open carry any gun you own, tomorrow. The concelaed permit is just that. The reference part is the most meaningless part of the application and this may be the case to have it tossed.

This woman and her attorney can claim that she was "picked out" of all the applications that were not checked and had her permit pulled. The LV insiders like to make up their own rules depending on who you know and what power they weild but on this one, she will eventually win. In fact based on the county's felonious sheriff deputy, the county will put a few bucks in her pocket. Good Job!

She may be as batty as a fruit fly but that will have to bne proved in a court of law. The "reference" blowup will more than likley result in having the entire section thrown from the permit process. The law is clear on the time limit the Sheriff has to approve the permit. County Counci would be nuts to let the Sheriff hire a bunch of guys to call references that will say, "nice guy" 99% fo the time. Yes there is a cost benefit process even on guns.

All you suceeded in doing is, throwing out a section of the permit. In the end she will get her permit and no one will have to fill out the references section.

No I am not Tricia you junior detectives. I don't know the lady. I do know about guns and the associated law and this reference deal is going down. You all just helped it along, thanks.

Good Job liberals.

Amend Wun said...

Having concern over a person applying for and receiving a LTCF who has admitted in court that she takes medication to deal with her mental health issues, has pleaded guilty in court to disorderly conduct after a violent tirade and is currently facing criminal harassment charges after allegedly impersonating others online to sway the public doesn't make one a liberal. All responsible gun owners, democrat or republican should see this as a failure in the system. It seems as tho some, out of some paranoid fear of a tyrannical government, would prefer to arm the entire populous first and worry about the consequences later.

Anonymous said...

"All you succeeded in doing is, throwing out a section of the permit. In the end she will get her permit and no one will have to fill out the references section."

I like the idea of attorney Rick Orloski. He wrote a letter to the editor of the Express-Times stating that an applicant for a LTCF should have to provide the Sheriff with letters of recommendation from their two references during the approval process. Is it too much to ask the applicant do a little bit more to show her good character and reputation?

Anonymous said...

Wun der kid, Has she been found mentally incompetent by a court? Has she been convicted of a felony?

Stop the dramatics. You would have the second amendment rights that,
shall not be infringed", infringed by angry political opponents, bureaucrats and angry ex-boyfriends.

Anonymous said...

Actually, 12:41 PM, you should read what Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a staunch conservative, had to say on the issue of concealed carry. Writing for the majority in DC v. Heller, Scalia said in 2008: "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited...For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues..."

So concealed carry is not a Second Amendment right, but is subject to state regulation and even prohibition.

Amend Wun said...

@12:41- your claims of dramatics are misplaced considering the individual in question, nor do I think your apparent allegiance warrants claims of victimhood on said individual. The issue is a matter of procedure and public safety. Ask yourself: if you didn't know this person personally, would you feel comfortable with them being armed, knowing there history as we do. Clearly, the public has a right to be concerned.

Anonymous said...

I know of no real history other than that portrayed by an ex-boyfriend and his lawyer. John Stoffa did like he even corresponded with her in some racy emails. So, I err in favor of ones rights.

Maybe Trish will bring those emails to the hearing.