Op-Ed: Eliminate PICS to Strengthen Our Rights and Save Money?

There has been recent speculation about Governor Corbett proposing cuts to the budget of the Pennsylvania State Police, which would be a blow to the communities relying on the State Police for protection. If we are looking at ways to eliminate spending without losing services, perhaps it is time to seriously consider eliminating the Pennsylvania Instant Check System (PICS), which is used to check potential handgun purchasers and is funded through the State Police budget.

According to information provided by Firearms Owners Against Crime, PICS has caused repeated havoc for licensed firearms dealers and citizens in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Problems range from outages during operation, inconsistencies amongst operators when requesting approvals to include ‘prolonged’ waiting periods throughout the approval process when the system is busy, especially on weekends.

FOAC claims the most worrisome aspect of this system is the position taken by the PA State Police that ‘if’ the system becomes inoperable, then firearms transfers cease. This means the Second Amendment could effectively cease to exist in the event of mechanical or electronic failure.

Critics maintain the PICS system is slow, costly, inefficient and redundant. The PICS system is notorious for weekend slowdowns in operation; this becomes especially troublesome for citizens and gun dealers during the holidays or gun show weekends. By comparison, critics maintain the National Instant Check System Challenge (NICS) procedure is well defined and straightforward.

PICS errors are distressingly common; these errors arise from a variety of sources. Two names can be identical, social security numbers (which PICS continues to use despite a Federal Court Order) can be transposed, very old court records can be wrong, or the sentence for a crime that was not punishable by more than a year in jail when it was committed can be later amended. These problems mean someone who is legally permitted to own a firearm are being denied that right, and appeals are difficult under the best of circumstances.

If a court record or FBI report is incomplete or ambiguous, authorities in Pennsylvania will presume the worst, and leave it to the individual to prove otherwise. I have had constituents personally describe not knowing why a denial was issued until their appeal hearing began, which makes preparation difficult if not impossible. Even a simple technical error cannot be properly disputed if the person appealing doesn’t have enough advance notice to obtain the correct information. This is inefficient at best, arguably a potential violation of due process at worst.

Another major concerns is that there are tens of thousands of gun owners who have been denied the purchase of a firearm and have not appealed, which places them in jeopardy of arrest and prosecution for being a disqualified individual attempting to purchase a firearm. Whether you agree with the Second Amendment or not, the right to own a firearm is well-defined law. If someone is legally entitled to purchase, own or transfer a gun, they should be afforded every opportunity under the law to do so. If the law claims the person should be deprived of those rights, then every possible bit of due process should be afforded to ensure that deprivation is lawful,legitimate and supported by documented fact.

The PICS process raises questions about these issues that could potentially be solved by switching to the NICS system. We could become more efficient and save money for the Pennsylvania State Police at the same time, which could offset budget cuts and keep more officers in uniform. For all these reasons, the pros and cons of eliminating PICS should be part of the debate as the state budget negotiations continue.