Reporting Lost and Stolen Guns

[Tipro]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...over-town-laws.html?cmpid=taboola.sustain.art

This doesn't seem to be new and may have been discussed, but the NRA has been fighting laws that would require gun owners to report lost or stolen handguns. Why is this worth fighting? It seems to me quite a reasonable law; am I missing anything? As a responsible gun owner it would seem like the right thing to do: to admit when you messed up and lost your gun, or when you were unfortunate enough to have it stolen. Is the concern that the gov't would know what guns you have? That doesn't seem right, as you only report when you no longer have the gun.

 

[janedoedad]

Should I be required to report a stolen bicycle? CD Player? Air nailer? Property is property. While it is a good idea to report a stolen (no excuse for 'losing' a firearm) firearm, I do not think the law should be involved in forcing me to report to LE.

 

[mgkdrgn]

Again, another moronic idea that will do nothing to stop gun crime, but do a lot to turn ordinary citizens into criminals.
Mr Bloomberg, if you want to stop gun crime, here is a novel idea for you: Try arresting CRIMINALS, and once you have them, KEEP THEM. Stop the krap of plea bargining armed robbery down to jaywalking.

 

[AlexanderA]

It's a no-brainer to report a stolen gun to the police -- not only do you increase your chances of getting it back if it's recovered, but you reinforce an insurance claim, and also insulate yourself from involvement if it's misused. Normally, therefore, a legal requirement to report is just redundant. It wouldn't bother me since it relates to something I would do anyway.

However, if this is being proposed by Bloomberg, it's worth opposing. Everything he touches smacks of the "nanny state." It seems there isn't a single government intrusion that he doesn't like.

 

[dusty14u]

I can see this as a stepping stone to be able to charge and arrest gun owners for not having secured their firearms within their residences. The homeowner would then bear the responsibility to make sure their guns are locked away and inaccessible while thieves wouldn't be responsible for taking guns that were easily stolen. Bloomberg does everything within his power to place blame on gun owners and not on criminals.

 

[smalls]

The downside is that a gun may be stolen, and you may not notice it right away. That shotgun you leave in the front closet? It was stolen two days ago, and used in a crime. You didn't even realize it yet, and now you're being charged for not reporting it stolen.

 

[joecil]

I had two pistols stolen for the first time in my life a year ago. I not only had pictures I had dates purchased who from, serial numbers as well as who stole them as it was a friend of my adult son's. I reported it as well as gave them her name as well as who she sold them to after taking them from my place as I had it all on camera. Some how she found the emergency keys to my gun safe and took two. Now after a year nothing, not a word from the police, she is still walking the streets, as is the buyer, so in my opinion no point in reporting it other that in the event they are found at a crime scene I can't be held responsible.

Oh and my 43 year old son was watching my business/home for a week so my wife and I could take some time off. One of the few vacations we have had in 48 years of marrage.

 

[pintler]

The original article seems to be talking about the NRA fighting to keep state pre-emption laws in place. I think that's a good thing - it's hard enough to keep track of state differences when you travel; letting every municipality make its own rules is a nightmare. I frequently am in several municipalities in the course of the day.

Aside from that, I think the devil is in the details. What are the penalties? How does it stop a straw buyer from merely reporting the gun stolen after selling it? If Granny and Gramps don't notice their evil nephew swiped the shotgun from the back of the closet (or used a Bic pen on the Homak lock), how many years do they spend in prison?

The rub is that if you make it a $100 fine, the straw buyer won't care, and if you make it a mandatory 5 years, you'll end up sending a few Gramps and Grannies to prison.

 

[medalguy]

Why do we need to make it a LAW that you report the theft of anything? Why do we need even more government snooping into our lives? If you want to report a gun or anything else stolen or missing, feel free to do so. Don't make it a law that you must report a theft within any time frame or under any circumstances.

 

[SMMAssociates]

These things tend to have mandatory (or badly defined) timing requirements attached....

Suppose you have a three day "window" to report, and you're out of town for a week....

Regards,

 

[Davek1977]

Its a safe bet to say that any legislation aimed SOLELY at gun owners is meant to, in some respects at least, meant to DEMONIZE gun owners, and therefore should be avoided.

 

[bigfatdave]

I am not responsible for the actions of criminals

That's all there is to it

 

[OARNGESI]

one other way to look at is how would they ever enforce it without firearm registration?
have you ever sold a gun what if that person loses the gun are you responsible?

 

[gfanikf]

one other way to look at is how would they ever enforce it without firearm registration?
have you ever sold a gun what if that person loses the gun are you responsible?

I believe that's the point of using a bill of sales.

 

[medalguy]

A bill of sale is totally worthless. Give me a name out of the phone book (remember those?) and I'll write up a bill of sale for a firearm to that person. Not worth the paper it's written on, and has no legal status.

If you sell a firearm and it's later used in a crime, and the police come to you, all you need to do is say you sold it in xx year. End of story, UNLESS your state has some kind of registration requirements, in which case you need to either work actively to change the law, or move to a free state where the 2A is still recognized.

 

[gfanikf]

A bill of sale is totally worthless. Give me a name out of the phone book (remember those?) and I'll write up a bill of sale for a firearm to that person. Not worth the paper it's written on, and has no legal status.

If you sell a firearm and it's later used in a crime, and the police come to you, all you need to do is say you sold it in xx year. End of story, UNLESS your state has some kind of registration requirements, in which case you need to either work actively to change the law, or move to a free state where the 2A is still recognized.

I should add that I also get Drivers Licence numbers and verify it from looking at it. I also tend (for all but a one or two old guns like a Steven's bolt action shotgun) require a PA LTCF. For C&R I get a copy of that too. Granted I don't always bother writing it down. lol Not the case with my C&R stuff though, since you have to make sure you keep that stuff logged.

Could you in theory get their Drivers Licence number...yes, but it's not as easy as the phone book.

 

[MedWheeler]

Dusty14u writes:

I can see this as a stepping stone to be able to charge and arrest gun owners for not having secured their firearms within their residences.

^This^

 

[gfanikf]

Dusty14u writes:



^This^

Aren't there already laws (I mean look at a Ruger Instruction Manual to find them lol) for negligent allowing of access?

That said a part of me is what if someone leaves something in the car and it's stolen (but was not just sitting out or unsecured it would be really unfair...but what if someone was just reckless and left it in an open area...then I realized we already have laws handling negligent and reckless behavior and torts too.

Still I think for insurance purposes you are going to have to report it.

 

[Bubbles]

It's a no-brainer to report a stolen gun to the police -- not only do you increase your chances of getting it back if it's recovered, but you reinforce an insurance claim, and also insulate yourself from involvement if it's misused. Normally, therefore, a legal requirement to report is just redundant. It wouldn't bother me since it relates to something I would do anyway.

However, if this is being proposed by Bloomberg, it's worth opposing. Everything he touches smacks of the "nanny state." It seems there isn't a single government intrusion that he doesn't like.

That was my thought. Personally I'd only support this initiative from Bloomberg if it included a law stating that the firearm had to be returned to the former owner and not destroyed by the LE agency that recovered it. I don't think he'd go for that, though.

 

[dayhiker]

Guys this isn't just in PA...

This is law in Connecticut.......

Sec. 53-202g. Report of loss or theft of assault weapon or other firearm. Penalty. (a) Any person who lawfully possesses an assault weapon under sections 29-37j and 53-202a to 53-202k, inclusive, and subsection (h) of section 53a-46a or a firearm, as defined in section 53a-3, that is lost or stolen from such person shall report the loss or theft to the organized local police department for the town in which the loss or theft occurred or, if such town does not have an organized local police department, to the state police troop having jurisdiction for such town within seventy-two hours of when such person discovered or should have discovered the loss or theft. Such department or troop shall forthwith forward a copy of such report to the Commissioner of Public Safety. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to the loss or theft of an antique firearm as defined in subsection (b) of section 29-37a.

(b) Any person who fails to make a report required by subsection (a) of this section within the prescribed time period shall commit an infraction and be fined not more than ninety dollars for a first offense and be guilty of a class D felony for any subsequent offense, except that, if such person intentionally fails to make such report within the prescribed time period, such person shall be guilty of a class C felony. Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section for the first offense shall not lose such person's right to hold or obtain any firearm permit under the general statutes.


So keep watch in your own states.....we weren't able to stop it here.

 

[gfanikf]

or should have discovered the loss or theft

See if the law didn't have that line I wouldn't care as much...because if someone steals your stuff aren't you going to report it?

That was my thought. Personally I'd only support this initiative from Bloomberg if it included a law stating that the firearm had to be returned to the former owner and not destroyed by the LE agency that recovered it. I don't think he'd go for that, though.

Yeah, if it insured that if not needed for evidence (and after any use it may need, because lets be honest it might) it is returned to the original owner...like all stolen property.

 

[Rob G]

within seventy-two hours of when such person discovered or should have discovered the loss or theft

This is why these laws are dangerous. Essentially they get to set an arbitrary time standard to how long you're allowed to go before reporting the weapon stolen.

This is how you get screwed: I have a locked place in my house where I keep my guns. Let's say somebody gets in a steals one somehow. Unless there's obvious signs of a break-in I'm not going to check that spot to see if any guns are missing. Also, I don't shoot very often so I might not see those guns more than once every three or four months. So exactly when should I have known that they were missing? I'd say if I reported it within six months I'd be good since that may be how long it actually takes me to realize one is missing. However the court might decide since it's a place in my house that I literally walk by every day that I should have known within hours of the theft.

You could end up a felon over something completely subjective.

 

[gfanikf]

This is why these laws are dangerous. Essentially they get to set an arbitrary time standard to how long you're allowed to go before reporting the weapon stolen.

This is how you get screwed: I have a locked place in my house where I keep my guns. Let's say somebody gets in a steals one somehow. Unless there's obvious signs of a break-in I'm not going to check that spot to see if any guns are missing. Also, I don't shoot very often so I might not see those guns more than once every three or four months. So exactly when should I have known that they were missing? I'd say if I reported it within six months I'd be good since that may be how long it actually takes me to realize one is missing. However the court might decide since it's a place in my house that I literally walk by every day that I should have known within hours of the theft.

You could end up a felon over something completely subjective.

Personally my objection would be lessened if the law was intentionally, but Purposfully or whatever the state has for it's highest required mens rea and also make it only a fineable misdameanor. In short nothing that can make the person lose their firearm rights over. The other thing is regarding a fine not discouraging a straw pruchaser...it's kind of a non-issue as there are more than enough laws on the books to charge those people (gun and non gun) that they don't need this extra charge.

That said even with intentionally as the standard I think with your example you could not convicted under the CT statute. They would need to prove you intentionally knew about the theft and did not report it.

That said I go back to my original point of wouldn't everyone just report it due to the insurance. I also think people should anyway, not because they have to.

 

[Rob G]

That said even with intentionally as the standard I think with your example you could not convicted under the CT statute. They would need to prove you intentionally knew about the theft and did not report it.

I'd disagree based on the wording of the law. If it was only possible to enforce it when someone intentionally didn't report the weapon missing then the law would read:

that is lost or stolen from such person shall report the loss or theft.............within seventy-two hours of when such person discovered the loss or theft.

However, what the law actually reads is this:

that is lost or stolen from such person shall report the loss or theft.............within seventy-two hours of when such person discovered or should have discovered the loss or theft.

If you wanted to make it absolutely certain that you would never prosecute somebody under this law that had not intentionally failed to report a weapon stolen you would use the first example. The second one does in fact open the door for innocent people to be prosecuted simply for not knowing that their guns have gone missing.

 

[SMMAssociates]

Rob G:

Obviously, using Bloomie's logic, a gun that can "go off by itself" can both discharge and find other housing....

Whole lot of firearms laws out there built around making criminals out of LAC's....

Regards,