« There are worse things than being robbed at gunpoint | Main | I love this "debate" footage »
PA carry permit revoked for ... 100% legal conduct
Snowflakes in Hell is reporting the case of a PA man who carried openly into a polling place (which, he pointed out when challenged, is completely legal), and is told his carry permit is being revoked. The grounds are a clause that denies permits to a person “whose character and reputation is such that the individual would be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety.” The sheriff contends that his open carry "violates the spirit of the law," even though it is completely legal.
8 Comments | Leave a comment
Don't be so sure about a reversal on appeal.
Remember, PA is the state whose gov was clocked on multiple occasions after having ordered his driver to travel in excess of 100 mph ... no legal jeopardy.
Also, the state legislature passed an illegal & unconstitutional pay raise in midnight session. The courts ruled that the reps have to return the money ... but the judges get to keep the raise.
Also, the gang bangers & welfare crowd in Phila is offing themselves at a higher than usual rate ... so the state is pushing more gun confiscation and regulation in spite of the clear wording of the state constitution
Don't count on PA judges to actually enforce the law and constitution.
This is outrageous!!!
This should go to the SCOTUS if necessary.
Gun manufacturers need to step up to the plate.
People will shy away from exercising their rights if they are led to believe that gun makers won't support the product they sell to legal buyers who use the firearms legally.
Gun makers make a lot of money off of us.
They need to support us if they want us to support them.
Gun makers should be paying for these legal battles.
I think M has a point. I have a PA permit as an out of stater. I think this guy is right but the best way to get his permit back might be to go apologize to the sheriff and try to get it back that way.
I know some will say he should not kow tow to sheriff who is wrong but I would not count on a judge, from any state, to uphold my firearm rights.
The provision relied upon by the sheriff is in a lot of state statutes that are "shall issue" and is commonly referred to a "naked man" provision. Many judges will say it gives a sheriff a certain amount of discretion whether that was the legislative intent or not.
Shall issue laws are not supposed to be discretionary. But the more things change the more they stay the same.
In Virginia they changed the statute a year or two ago to make it slightly more difficult for the sheriff to say "he's not a good guy" and deny your permit.
Among the various specific disqualifiers is this one:
An individual who the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, based on specific acts by the applicant, is likely to use a weapon unlawfully or negligently to endanger others. The sheriff, chief of police, or attorney for the Commonwealth may submit to the court a sworn written statement indicating that, in the opinion of such sheriff, chief of police, or attorney for the Commonwealth, based upon a disqualifying conviction or upon the specific acts set forth in the statement, the applicant is likely to use a weapon unlawfully or negligently to endanger others. The statement of the sheriff, chief of police, or the attorney for the Commonwealth shall be based upon personal knowledge of such individual or of a deputy sheriff, police officer, or assistant attorney for the Commonwealth of the specific acts, or upon a written statement made under oath before a notary public of a competent person having personal knowledge of the specific acts.
Note the requirement that the allegation that the person is unfit must be based on the "personal knowledge" of the person making the allegation. They can't just say "I don't think you're fit to carry a gun." Of course, I am sure there are still opportunities to play a bit fast and loose with this, if they feel the need to do so.
The most complete and thorough conversation I know of concerning this issue is the log that the person in question started on PAFOA.
http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed-open-carry-121/11309-hassled-polls-ocing.html
I had a problem just like the first guy. I was playing with a air soft toy and the police were called me and my brother also we were patted down and we both had weapons on are person that they missed and had to tell the officer that we were carrying and had valid permits to do so. Were transported to the station and were harassed and the permits were pulled with a valid reason and all that we were told was because the chief said so and the chief has a issue with our grandfathers many years ago and he made these comments to us and said he will do everything in his power to make sure we never get them back. and so far hes getting his way he knows the sheriffs that deals with the carry permits. The guns were taken for like three months and they told us we had to have somebody with a valid carrying permit to pick them up. and every other police official I had talked too said they cannot do what did. but i do not know what to do my previously history has nothing I never did anything wrong in my life and then this. I FEEL THAT MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED.
IF ANYONE CAN ADVISE ME ON THIS PROBLEM PLEASE EMAIL ME AT [email protected]
Thank, You
Read article in Observer Reporter on 1-26-08 about Pitt Police officers being charged with many serious crimes. They were alowed to return to their jobs and carry their guns. This is a case where only an elete group of people are above the law (the police) They should have lost their right to carry a firearm which would have cost them their job. If this would have been some one other than a cop he would never get a permit and never work in law enforcement. You can see the double standards.
This will of course be overturned on appeal and, if I were the guy who got his permit revoked, I would sue the sheriff for violation of my rights.