PA Firearms Laws

The statistical data contained herein is compiled directly from PA Commission on Sentencing records for the ten year period beginning in 1995. It is our goal to examine the imposition of the penalties on criminals for violations of the PA Uniform Firearms Act (UFA).

This report reveals a disturbingly consistent trend in the failure of authorities to aggressively prosecute repeat violent criminals, while at the same time calling on the legislature to pass more and more controls on firearms that will ensnare unintentional nonviolent technical violators and rarely, if at all, the true criminals. The excuses of prosecutors and judges wear thin and undercut the expressed legislative intent of this section of law (the Uniform Firearms Act). Prison overcrowding, judicial dislike for tough sentences, political transference of responsibility for crime, etc. are all part of this crime dilemma. The UFA was created under mantra of “IF it saves one life” and the banner of so called “common sense”, “reasonable” firearms restrictions/regulations. However the ‘actual’ result is an overwhelming number of infringements on law abiding citizen’s rights for the public good. Laws have been enacted under the pretense of “feel good” or “we have to do something” rhetoric.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin

“You do not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered”. -- Lyndon B. Johnson

“Pennsylvania has taken an important step forward in the fight to reduce gun violence. Passage of the Fumo/Heckler Firearms Act will keep guns out of the wrong hands. Pennsylvania now has one of the most comprehensive lists of prohibitions on purchase, sale, transfer or possession of guns in the country. Statement of handgun control, inc. Chair Sarah Brady on passage of comprehensive firearms legislation. (Sp. Sess. HB 110/Act 17) IN PENNSYLVANIA (June 6, 1995)

The flawed concept sold for public consumption is this: enacting ever more strict gun control polices will effectively curb firearm related violence. Many new laws are enacted but few address the possession of or use of a firearm during the commission of a crime OR the accountability of the courts and prosecutors for those who should have been in jail for committing these crimes. Consequently a reexamination of our current firearms laws will demonstrate, as the National Academy of Sciences discovered in their recent study, that each is ill conceived. In fact most of the current sections of the Uniform Firearms Act were enacted to prevent criminals from obtaining guns or punishing those that do and use them in crime. As these charts demonstrate, the laws enacted to stop criminal misuse of firearms are circumvented by the failure to prosecute. Strong laws without equal prosecution produce two glaring results, both of which are unacceptable: disdain and ignorance of the laws by the most violent predators among us AND the public is given a false sense of security that ‘something’ is being done.

Deals are often made by district attorneys to streamline prosecutions with the result that there ends up being a reduction in charges or reduced sentences. Unfortunately career ‘violent’ criminals who know how to work the system end up being placed on a fast track through the system and end up back on the streets to prey upon those that testified against them or the unknowing innocent citizen. Meanwhile, honest Pennsylvania citizens fall victim to technical violations, activities that cause no harm and are perfectly legal in other states. The following quote reveals the essence of the problem (03/23/2008-Philadelphia Inquirer):

“In Pennsylvania and other states, police and prosecutors generally haven't made straw buyers a priority.

In Philadelphia, the police unit responsible for tracking guns is only now digging out of a 6,000-case backlog caused by inadequate staffing. The delays got so bad that judges sometimes dismissed cases because necessary lab work wasn't finished in time.

And most of the state's 67 county prosecutors didn't file ANY CASES against alleged straw buyers in 2006 or 2007, court records show. (emphasis added)

In Philadelphia, Assistant District Attorney Albert Toczydlowski said his office rarely prosecuted straw buyers until recently, when the state set up a task force to focus on gun violence.

The unit is making about 10 arrests a month, only a small fraction of offenders.

Federal prosecutors in Philadelphia, who have the advantage of stronger criminal penalties, likewise file only about 20 to 30 cases a year. It's a matter of limited resources, a spokesman said.”

This, is the Catch and Release attitude of “the criminal” injustice system that breeds and perpetuates violent crime. While “Catch and Release” concepts work for fishermen it is a TERRIBLE policy for dealing with repeat violent criminals.

Concurrent Sentencing vs. Consecutive Sentences

Concurrent sentencing is when a criminal is convicted of violating several different sections of law and serves the sentence for each conviction at the same time.

Under concurrent sentencing guidelines lets assume an offender has three different convictions being 5, 7 & 10 years in total. Some would assume that the offender would serve up to a total 22 years. INCORRECT! The most they would serve is 10 years maximum sentence or considerably less with the eligibility for early parole. (Often times the 5 Year Mandatory for the use of a gun in a crime will be added, when it IS used, onto a sentence in this way so the record shows usage of this section of law but the intended impact on the criminal is worthless as a public safety measure)

Consecutive sentencing would implement the full 22 years maximum also with possibility of parole after many more years spent behind bars.

The choice between criminals running loose on the streets or being incarcerated is an easy one. How, is it in the interest of public safety that our laws are ignored when they were enacted based on the need to improve public safety? How better to serve the public interest than to sentence accordingly! How many innocent lives could have been saved if the violent repeat offender had been serving their full sentence?

Criminals spending the maximum time behind bars is better than criminals running around loose on the streets terrorizing, robbing, raping and murdering innocent citizens along with keeping police out of the line of fire. How many lives have been ruined by this “slap on the wrist” type of punishment? How many early parolees returned to the streets only to murder again?

Criminals convicted of Pennsylvania firearm charges can also be charged with similar Federal firearm laws violations because there is concurrent jurisdiction in this area of criminal conduct. This means that criminals could serve a sentence handed down by a state court and then serve time in federal prison for maximum punishment.

Abbreviation key for Sentencing Commission Charts Columns below:

How to read the information on these types on sentence reports charts each column has sub-columns.

Percent - Next column is percentage of total number charged under this entire section.

Prison and Jail columns - people were convicted and served time for violation of this section of the law (see min vs. max sentence section).

The other columns are only “Slaps on the wrist” for breaking currently existing laws. What kind of message is sent to criminals if they break laws without strong consequence for their actions?

RIP – (Reduction In Punishment) – those who committed the crime received less punishment than the law required.

Probation - Offenders did not receive jail time for a particular crime whether the sentence was plea bargained away by the district attorney, or the judge suspended their sentence (only to release them on their own recognizance back on to the streets).

Any undefined offense under the PA Uniform Firearms Act (UFA) is graded as a misdemeanor of the first degree (Title 18, Section 6119). A misdemeanor of the first degree conviction prohibits that individual from owning firearms for the rest of their life as well as anyone that lives with them.

Certain individuals are not permitted to possess any firearm, including, but not limited to people convicted of murder, aggravated assault, kidnapping, rape, burglary, arson or drug offenses carrying at least a two-year prison term; individuals who have been involuntarily committed to a mental institution; illegal aliens; or individuals subject to a protection from abuse order that prohibits possession of a firearms.

Under current PA law, anyone using a firearm in the commission of a crime faces an additional 5-year mandatory sentence (Title 42, Section 9712) that can be imposed on them if the courts do their job and sentence in accordance with the law.

Title 18 section 908: Prohibited Offensive Weapons

This section does not apply to law enforcement officers, or people licensed to deal, sell, or repair items. This section is also not applicable to people that are allowed to possesses any firearm or offensive weapon which serves a common lawful purposes or is not prohibited by any laws of the commonwealth.

Previously convicted felons are not allowed to own any of the following items and most other non prohibited citizens can posses some of these items for lawful purposes and only under very strict guideline or specific laws such as the national firearm act.

Definitions.-As used in this section, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings given to them in this subsection:

"Firearm." Any weapon that is designed to or may readily be converted to expel any projectile by the action of an explosive, or the frame or receiver of any such weapon. "Offensive weapons" Any bomb, grenade, machine gun, sawed-off shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches, firearm specially made or specially adapted for concealment or silent discharge, any blackjack, sandbag, metal knuckles, dagger, knife, razor or cutting instrument, the blade of which is exposed in an automatic way by switch, push-button, spring mechanism, or otherwise, any stun gun, stun baton, taser or other electronic or electric weapon or other implement for the infliction of serious bodily injury which serves no common lawful purpose.

The intent of this poorly worded statute seems to be that any person who is prohibited from owning a firearm is also prohibited from possession or use of an electric or electronic incapacitation device. A non-prohibited person may probably possess and use an electric or electronic incapacitation device in the exercise of reasonable force in Self-Defense only of the person (very similar to the use of firearms in self defense situations). If someone uses one of these electronic incapacitation devices with the intent to commit a crime the sentence rises to a second-degree felony, otherwise it’s rated as a first-degree misdemeanor.

Year	Prison				Jail				RIP			Probation			RS		Total
	Number	Percent	Min	Max	Number	Percent	Min	Max	Number	Percent	Min	Number	Percent	Min	Number	Percent
1996	14	7.9%	12.6	29.5	40	22.5%	3.9	19.8	3	1.7%	3.2	95	53.4%	26.2	26	14.6%	178
1997	10	6.3%	9.4	31.2	38	23.8%	4.7	20.5	7	4.4%	13.0	79	49.4%	21.6	26	16.3%	160
1998	17	8.8%	22.8	52.6	51	26.4%	.	18.3	8	4.1%	13.9	97	50.3%	21.6	20	10.4%	193
1999	19	9.9%	12.4	31.6	55	28.6%	3.2	19.5	9	4.7%	8.9	90	46.9%	22.0	19	9.9%	192
2000	13	6.4%	12.8	32.7	44	21.7%	4.8	20.3	6	3.0%	19.8	126	62.1%	19.6	14	6.9%	203
2001	17	9.8%	17.9	46.2	52	30.1%	3.3	18.5	7	4.0%	4.1	84	48.6%	22.0	13	7.5%	173
2002
2003
2004	30	14.4%	13.2	34.6	49	23.6%	3.8	18.0	9	4.3%	7.5	113	54.3%	21.2	7	3.4%	208
2005	24	10.9%	12.3	29.0	48	21.7%	4.0	18.6	10	4.5%	5.3	121	54.8%	21.7	18	8.1%	221
Title 18 Section 908 Convictions & Sentences																	1528

Title 18 section 3903 (a) (2): Theft of Firearms

Considering the sheer number of firearms that police confiscate from criminals why are these numbers so low? Criminals only have a few avenues for acquiring firearms either they are obtaining by theft (covered in this section), buying illegal firearms from other criminals, illegal straw purchases or from illegal importation into the country.

From this table, CRIMINALS only receive jail time in 2/3 of the cases when convicted of a stolen gun charge as part of overall prosecution. How can an individual who possessed a stolen gun as part of other ‘more serious’ charges walk away 30% of the time?