SAF, Partners File Brief Opposing Warrantless Searches of Gun Dealers

The Fourth Amendment doesn’t allow for some provisions that permit the state to search your property without a warrant simply because you’re selling a legal product in accordance with all other applicable laws. That said, there are times when a law explicitly allows for it. The argument is probably something like how, if you don’t want to be searched without a warrant, you don’t have to sell something like guns.

But again, there’s nothing in the Fourth Amendment that actually allows them that authority.

That’s why the Second Amendment Foundation, along with its partners, filed a brief in a case challenging a Pennsylvania law that does just that.

From a press release:

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have filed a response and reply brief with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Schmidt v. Paris, a case challenging warrantless searches and seizures from licensed firearms dealers in the commonwealth. 

The lawsuit challenges Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) regulation, and County Sheriff policy, that requires an applicant for a license to sell firearms in the state agree to warrantless searches by the State Police, or their designee, to ensure compliance with state law. Furthermore, these inspections would allow regulators to seize license holders or employees for up to two hours, compel them to answer any questions posed, provide documentation, and threatens to revoke their state license to sell firearms for refusing to comply with the demands. SAF is joined in the case by Shot Tec and private citizen Grant Schmidt. 

“Selling guns in accordance with state and federal law does not require that a seller waive their other constitutional rights,” said SAF Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack. “Warrantless searches of these businesses are unlawful, and particularly egregious when you consider that many FFL dealers run their business out of their private residence.” 

In passing the Uniform Firearms Act, the Pennsylvania General Assembly included no provision allowing for warrantless searches of firearms dealers. SAF’s suit alleges that the PSP’s subsequent promulgation of a regulation allowing for such searches, and Montgomery County Sheriff Sean Kilkenny’s stated policy of conducting searches of Federal Firearms Licensees absent probable cause, run afoul of the Pennsylvania state constitution.

“These regulations are nothing more than an attempt to thwart the Second Amendment rights of Pennsylvanians,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Whether it’s in Pennsylvania – or any other state – Americans are allowed to exercise their full constitutional rights without fear of government agencies enforcing frivolous laws. As we have done for more than 50 years, SAF will continue fighting to ensure the Second Amendment is not relegated to a second-class right.”  

Let’s keep in mind that the vast majority of guns that get trafficked are not sold by gun stores with the intention of them being trafficked. Straw buys happen, but they’re usually sneaky enough not to alert the dealer. These guys aren’t the problem.

However, they’re also an easy scapegoat for anti-gun types simply because they’ve usually got a storefront or their name on a list of FFL holders. They’re easy to find and easy to treat like they’re responsible for all of the ills of the world.

But they’re not.

See, most guns that are in criminal hands didn’t come from a gun store directly. They passed through at least one set of hands, and not all of those hands were in on what was going to happen. What I mean is that a lot of them are stolen from lawful people who never intended for their guns to end up with the bad guys.

While gun control groups have concocted all sorts of ways to supposedly “prove” that a gun store is complicit, they haven’t actually done any such thing. Every now and then, you’ll get an FFL holder who gets convicted of arming criminals in some way, but they’re the exception, not the rule.

So why does Pennsylvania think it needs the authority to treat gun store owners and employees like criminals, all without a warrant?

Because they haven’t been smacked down in court over it, apparently.

Let’s hope they get that lesson very soon.

Editor’s Note: The radical left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.

Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.