News reported a justified self-defense shooting in Tacoma

[Cesiumsponge]

An interesting story I heard on the news about 15 minutes ago on the KIRO news station. There was a shooting in Tacoma, WA and like the morbid and pessimistic person I was, I was awaiting all the gory details about semi-automatic 50BMG revolvers so I could shake my head.

The story started out on how there was a shooting involved between two armed individuals and panned shots of the area. The reporter goes further into details about stating eyewitness accounts on how an armed boyfriend was dragging his girlfriend around by her hair in some apartment-looking courtyard area. Then it was said a neighbor came out and was chased back into the home by said boyfriend and later returned with a firearm and shot the boyfriend dead.

I was expecting this to be the end of the story but they interviewed a woman standing in her doorway with the door half closed from the reporter on the scene (not sure if it was the aforementioned girlfriend or a young female neighbor) and mentioned that the neighbor (paraphrased) "went and got a licensed handgun and shot the guy". After that statement, it cut to a scene with two parked cars (why? I don't know) and the news caster made a disclaimer-like blurb about the shooter being later released by police as it was justified self-defense.

I didn't expect a story on justified self-defense but 75% of the story from the beginning painted it in a negative light with the quick interview and disclaimer at the end. I guess this story was a fluke. I tried looking up a printed story but only found this article, which is 13 hours old :http://www.komotv.com/stories/37498.htm

How often does justified self-defense stories make the television news? This is the first time I recall hearing it and it wasn't entirely pro-self-defense til the very end...even then it was just a statement, not an opinion from anyone that the right thing was done.

 

[heypete]

While that's great that everything ended well (except for the crazy boyfriend), it's a shame they bother to include the "licensed handgun" bit.

The only licenses required in regards to guns in Washington state are CCWs, aren't they? I have my resident CCW there, that I got when at Fort Lewis, and it's still valid even though I've moved back home to California (though it's not valid here, of course).

If the person had a CCW, that's fine...but otherwise, it adds a bit to the public idea that licensing firearms is an OK thing to do, which it absolutely is not.

Now, if they said "grabbed a lawfully-owned firearm" or simply "a firearm", that would be even better. But including the "licensed firearm" bit (no firearms are licensed, though the person with a CCW is...) is a bit misleading and one of my personal peeves.

I'll go skulk off here now...

 

[c_yeager]

No such thing as a "licensed handgun" in the state of Washington. Fueling the idea that there is such an animal just makes it easier to convince the voters that such things are acceptable come initiative season. Serious lack of details in that article, but then again, a shooting in Tacoma, Washington barely qualifies as "news" in the first place.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Fueling the idea that there is such an animal just makes it easier to convince the voters that such things are acceptable come initiative season.

Bingo! An amazingly large number of non-shooters believe licenses are required to own guns.

 

[heypete]

Bingo! An amazingly large number of non-shooters believe licenses are required to own guns.

...and, when informed that licenses are not required, they believe they should be.

With some people, rather interesting conversations ensue. This week, I convinced two people to buy their first guns.

 

[DirtyBrad]

This is a good opportunity for me to ask an embarrassingly ingnorant question. What is a "licensed" firearm or firearm owner?

I have two guns, a shotgun and a pistol. I live in Maryland. When I bought my shotgun, it was about a thirty minute process while the clerk called in my info to the FBI (and who knows who else). When I bought my pistol, it was of course a much longer deal. I had to wait about ten days for all the stuff to clear.

Now, I read a lot about how we don't want our guns licensed and how that creates a list of all guns and who owns them, which can be used later to come get them. Obviously, the powers that be know all about my 870 and my USP (in the case of the USP, they even have fired brass from it at the State Police barracks). If I threw both my guns out the window tonight, I'm guessing that the police would be knocking on my door tomorrow after having looked up the serial numbers and finding my name and address.

Does this mean I or my guns are licensed? If not, what would be the difference?

 

[Cesiumsponge]

There isn't. The lady just didn't know what she was talking about when she was asked a question. I suppose they stuck that in there to confuse people.

 

[heypete]

DirtyBrad,

The guns aren't "licensed" or "registered" with any law enforcement agency (not sure about the pistol, that might be a state thing -- in California, all pistols are supposed to be registered).

The dealer retains the Form 4473 (the yellow sheet) on their premesis for the required minimum of 20 years, after which time I believe they can destroy it (anyone confirm?). If the dealer goes out of business, all forms must go to the ATF.

If you were to throw the guns out the window, the police would call the ATF and request a trace. They give the ATF the make, model, and serial number. The ATF calls the manufacturer with that information, who says who they sold the gun to (in almost all cases, to a distributor). ATF calls the distributor, asks who they sold it to (say, a dealer). ATF calls the dealer, gets the information from the yellow sheet. Then they knock on your door.

I don't mind the dealer having a record of their sale...I DO mind having the government have a list of the name, address, and every gun owned by a particular individual.

California has no record of any long-guns I own. When the background check information is sent to their system, it has my identifying information (name, birthdate, city of birth, etc.) and the type of gun "Long Gun" or "Handgun, with make, model, serial, caliber, etc." sent to them. They retain handgun information, but discard long-gun info and (presumably) records of the sale. The FBI's NICS system is required by law to discard background check information after 24 hours, though I think they hold onto "Denied" information for a set time (or indefinitely, not sure).

If you buy guns through a private-party transfer, the government has no way of knowing you have that particular gun -- if you lost it, the trace would end with the original buyer. It's up to the buyer to keep records of their sale, and many don't. They're not required by law to keep said records.

 

[TallPine]

Well, if I was going back to my home to get a weapon to face an armed and currently violent person, I wouldn't be grabbing a handgun ("licensed" or otherwise).

I would be grabbing the nastiest rifle that I could put my hands on.

 

[DirtyBrad]

Pete,

Thanks for the time and info.

You're saying then, that the cops would have no way of finding out whose shotgun they found in the gutter, but could trace the pistol back to me via the dealer?

That's surprising and I wonder how well they really stick to those rules.

Also, here in Maryland -- if I'm not mistaken -- you have to go through the State Police (or at least an FFL) when you participate in private party transfers. That's true of handguns, anyway; I'm not sure about long guns.

Thanks again.

 

[heypete]

Thanks for the time and info.

My pleasure.

You're saying then, that the cops would have no way of finding out whose shotgun they found in the gutter, but could trace the pistol back to me via the dealer?

No, all guns purchased through a dealer (with the exception of certain antiques and blackpowder guns, which aren't considered "firearms" by law, don't need to go through a dealer, etc.) that have a 4473 filled out for them are traceable.

All guns, both handguns and long guns, purchased through a dealer are required to have a 4473 filled out. Certain situations, such as returning a firearm to the manufacturer for repair/refurbishment does not require such a form, as it's being returned to you, the lawful owner.

Private party transfers (i.e. you selling a gun to a friend of yours face-to-face) in most states is perfectly legal and requires no paperwork. This is the much-maligned but little-understood-by-anti-gun-people "gun show loophole". Useful if one wishes to purchase a gun that "The Man" doesn't know about.

That's surprising and I wonder how well they really stick to those rules.

It is a federal crime for dealers NOT to stick to those rules.

Also, here in Maryland -- if I'm not mistaken -- you have to go through the State Police (or at least an FFL) when you participate in private party transfers. That's true of handguns, anyway; I'm not sure about long guns.

Not sure about Maryland laws. You might want to check the NRA-ILA site -- http://www.nraila.org/ and look up your state laws.

Cheers!

 

[MudPuppy]

If it was a licensed handgun, I'd guess it was either a Full-Auto or equipped with an integral suppressor.

 

[c_yeager]

For clarification, by my understanding for something to be licensed one must obtain a license as "permission" for a purchase or use. You need a license BEFORE you can drive a car, or go fishing/hunting.

Registration is when you provide identifying information for an object to an agency that keeps records of such ownership. for example you register your car AFTER its purchased.

License = permission, Registration = records

Like it or not we DO have registration in this country. You dont REALLY think they actually throw out those forms you fill you, do you? But, we dont have licensing on a national level, and few states do.

 

[heypete]

c_yeager: It's my understanding that FFLs can dispose of their 4473s after 20 years.

That said, no agency maintains those records. They are not on file with the ATF (unless the FFL goes under, and they mail the records to the ATF), nor can they be easily queried or searched in some sort of automated database. A person needs to flip through actual physical pieces of paper. It's a pain in the ass, and I like it that way.

Of course, if an FFL were willing to take the heat, they could destroy the records. 4473s are not shredproof or fireproof. They would be facing felony charges, though. Still, if an FFL did that, there'd be no record of who owned the guns or who the FFL sold them to. Something to keep in mind if national firearm registration were ever to take effect...

 

[Andrew Rothman]

A little more info on the original subject of the thread:

From http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/crime/story/4958721p-4534096c.html

Argument ends in fatal shooting

JASON HAGEY; The News Tribune
Published: June 19th, 2005 12:01 AM
A 22-year-old man who had been arguing with his girlfriend was shot and killed early Saturday after another man overheard the argument and tried to break it up, police said.

It happened about 2:40 a.m. at an apartment in the 4300 block of South Union Avenue in Tacoma, said police spokesman Mark Fulghum.

Richard Matthews, who recently moved into his girlfriend’s apartment, pulled a gun on the man who tried to intervene, Fulghum said.

But the would-be peacekeeper, identified by police only as an approximately 30-year-old Tacoma man, also was carrying a gun.

He fired “numerous” shots at Matthews before Matthews could get off a shot, Fulghum said.

Matthews was pronounced dead at the scene, Fulghum said.

No other injuries were reported.

Police officers who happened to be nearby heard the gunfire and arrived soon after the shooting, Fulghum said.

The shooter was cooperative with officers, Fulghum said. Detectives interviewed him and let him go. It will be up to prosecutors to decide whether to charge him with a crime.

Based on what police saw, “This guy just had a quicker draw,” Fulghum said. “The prosecutor will make the decision, but it looks like he didn’t have much choice.”

Jason Hagey: 253-597-8542

[email protected]

 

[c_yeager]

That said, no agency maintains those records. They are not on file with the ATF (unless the FFL goes under, and they mail the records to the ATF), nor can they be easily queried or searched in some sort of automated database. A person needs to flip through actual physical pieces of paper. It's a pain in the ass, and I like it that way.

Then how is it that firearms are often traced back to their original owners based soley on the serial number of the firearm? We have heard countless tales of stolen guns being recovered by police and returned after being used in a crime. There are a few threads on this board in which people sold guns only to have them traced back to them down the line. How is any of this posible if the records are not mantained?

 

[K-Romulus]

DirtyBrad - welcome to THR

I am also a fellow MD'r. When I moved here from the Grand Commonwealth of Virginia two years ago, I read up on all the MD laws to see what the deal was north of the Potomac.

By state law, the MD State Police do keep a registry of handgun/certain semi-auto transfers that take place in MD. These handguns and certain semi-autos are known as "regulated firearms" under MD law, and thus require the MSP check and waiting period.

The MD system is not technically "gun registration" because you don't have to do anything more beyond the initial paperwork, unlike a car registration that must be renewed. If you move into the state with a handgun/certain semi-auto, you don't have to "register" them because there was no "transfer" of ownership that took place in MD, unlike NY state which requires registration in that situation because it has true "gun registration." If you move out of MD, you also don't have to do anything, again unlike NY state which (I believe) requires you to notify the local police in that situation because there is true gun registration there. If you sell or give away your handgun in MD, then you should fill out the MSP forms to record the "transfer."

The PA Supreme Court recently ruled against a challenge to the PA handgun transfer record system, which is identical to MD's system except it only applies to handguns and there is no waiting period. The suit alleged that the transfer records were a "gun registry" that violated state law. The court described all of these points that I just did in deciding that transfer records were not the same as "gun registration." It's a fine distinction, but I believe it is a meaningless distinction.

In MD, all other firearms besides handguns and certain listed semi-autos are not considered "regulated firearms." That means that pump, bolt, lever, break action, and certain "unregulated" semi-auto long firearms do not come under the MSP check process, and can be immediately transferred without paperwork to anyone not barred by MD or Fed law from owning a firearm.

In MD, the MSP will trace a regulated firearm by looking at their transfer database to see who is on record as the last owner. Tracing an unregulated firearm in MD means the ATF would need to do their trace as others described here.

Hope this helps.

Edited to add:

Oh yeah, I forgot to answer your actual question on "licensed owners."

That means the person obtained a "gun owner license," just like how you get a driver's license. Some states have these under different names like "license to carry" (but you can't actually "carry"), firearms owner ID card (aka "FOID), and "pistol permit."