[ZeBool]

My buddy from Lawrence County PA called me today to inform me that he had received his PA LTCF in the mail. I congratulated him and began discussing some PA law regarding concealed carry when he mentioned a paper that came in the same envelope with his permit with different rules regarding carry that he had several questions about. As we were going to be shooting together later in the evening I told him to bring the paper along with him and I would advise him as best as I was able to.

At around 4o clock this afternoon he showed up and we had a great (if chilly) afternoon of shooting. After the targets were picked up, guns cleaned, and cocoa made, he showed me the "informative" paper that the sheriff department had sent with his concealed carry permit. on the paper were listed places he CANNOT(yes it was capitalized) concealed carry in pennsylvania. This list included airports, schools, federal facilities, and BARS. Wrong. Nothing in PA law stating that one cannot carry legally into a bar.

Now, I may have been willing to let that one slide. I support our right to carry into a bar, but personally choose not to for obvious reasons, and feel that others should exercise good judgement as well. However, I am not willing to let the next erroneous statement go unchallenged. Quahliero stated " while carrying a firearm it must be CONCEALED(yes capitalized again) on your person."
Totally, completely, and utterly WRONG.

I am incensed that a sheriff department would issue a paper with their LTCF that is so glaringly inaccurate. I have a mind to write them a letter or stop down in person to receive an explanation for these inaccuracies.

Thoughts?

On a side note, I wish to add that i wrote this entire post from my cell phone, so please excuse any grammatical errors. I did my best.

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

I am guessing that that sheriff is from a different state. MOST states that allow concealed carry do NOT allow you to carry in a BAR (restaurants with a bar but generate more than 50% of profit from food are allowed) and also most states require that you keep your weapon concealed if you are carrying under a CCW. Could easily just be a reasonable mistake on the person that typed up the letter. Before you get all hyped up yelling at a public official, maybe you should take a breath and realize people do make mistakes. It is an easy one to make since the MAJORITY of states are written up like that letter.

[ZeBool]

A sheriff in Pennsylvania should know PENNSYLVANIA law, especially if he is sending out information about a particular point of law. Funny how I'm not allowed to make mistakes when it comes to carrying guns or gun laws. Ask Brian Aitken.

[Gouranga]

Zebool, best to relax a bit. I understand the frustration. If you go into the Sheriffs office or write them with any tone you will get a brick wall in response.

Better to give them the benefit of the doubt and try the soft approach first. If you get stonewalled then at least you know it is intentional.

A cop SHOULD know the laws in their jurisdiction but there so many laws that it is common for an officer to not know them all, even a Sheriff. Try approaching them calmly and pointing out the inaccuracy, maybe offer an alternate wording for them. You may have more luck.

[hso]

Does PA require a course be taken before applying for the carry permit?

Is it a state course?

Make a copy and send it to the state agency responsible for the training and issuance of the permit.

[ZeBool]

Admittedly I am very angry about this. However, it is not my intention to go into the Sheriff's office and scream at them. I have more self control than that. That being said, I fully believe that they need to have this brought to their attention. I intend to do just that, in a calm and collected manner.

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

Good deal. Most times that is the best way to present a problem.

[ZeBool]

Hso: there is no training requirement for a PA LTCF. The only requirement is a clean background. Basically, if you can buy a handgun you can get a permit to carry it.

[mljdeckard]

I agree. a cop is the last person you should ask for advice on points of law. But if THE Sheriff signs his name to a letter, he should make a reasonable effort to know what the heck he is talking about.

[Gouranga]

I intend to do just that, in a calm and collected manner.

Awesome! Keep us posted on your reply.

We have had our share of trouble with NC sheriffs who decide to illegally insert requirements and/or fees into the CCW process in NC. One county sheriff collected more than $100,000 in illegal fees over a 5 year period. So yeah, you do need to hold them accountable. I found about 7 times out of 10 the issues with Sheriffs in NC were ignorance rather than deliberate defiance of law and yes, I agree, they SHOULD know this stuff.

Hopefully your gentle nudge sets them straight. If you can reference the specific state laws in your response that should have the best effect.

[Double Naught Spy]

A sheriff in Pennsylvania should know PENNSYLVANIA law,
Yep, but I bet you can't find any one officer anywhere that knows all of the laws of his/her state.

especially if he is sending out information about a particular point of law.
Yep, the letter probably should have been reviewed by the DA or AG before it went out.

[Black Butte]

Find a Pennsylvania newspaper that publishes reader comments, then write up a short piece in a respectful tone identifying the errors. The Sheriff will then be on notice, in a very public way, that he is in error. The next step will be up to him.

[unloved]

I am incensed that a sheriff department would issue a paper with their LTCF that is so glaringly inaccurate.

It isn't at all uncommon. Many PA Sheriffs are woefully uninformed. I don't have a number, but more than one gives out a similar incorrect letter. Many charge more for LTCFs than the law allows. Many take longer to issue (or deny) than the law allows. Frankly, it's a mess. A mess that no one in gov't is willing to address.

It's perfectly legal to carry (concealed, or openly) in the non-secure areas of airports, BTW.

[NavyLCDR]

also most states require that you keep your weapon concealed if you are carrying under a CCW

8 states is not most. TX, OK, AR, IL, FL, SC, NY and DC are the only 8 states (and DC isn't even a state!) for which your statement is true.

[NavyLCDR]

If you are going to address the Sheriff's mistakes, you might also want to mention state preemption:

PA Statute Title 18, section 6120:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/18/18.HTM

§ 6120. Limitation on the regulation of firearms and
ammunition.
(a) General rule.--No county, municipality or township may
in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession,
transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition
components when carried or transported for purposes not
prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth.

[milq]

8 states is not most. TX, OK, AR, IL, FL, SC, NY and DC are the only 8 states (and DC isn't even a state!) for which your statement is true.
Perhaps I misunderstand what you're saying here, but I can decidedly say that IL has absolutely ZERO provision for any type of carry, concealed or otherwise.

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

8 states is not most. TX, OK, AR, IL, FL, SC, NY and DC are the only 8 states (and DC isn't even a state!) for which your statement is true.


Uhhh Navy, IL doesn't even HAVE concealed carry for one. For 2, if I remember correctly Tennessee also requires you to keep it concealed if you are carrying under a CCW as well as NC, SC, FL, and most other states that do not presently allow OPEN carry of firearms.

[esquare]

It happens quite often - and it happened to me. The instructions I got had quite a few restrictions that were claimed to be federal law, but they weren't. While none of them affect me currently, I would suggest that a polite letter asking to clarify the restrictions is a good place to start. Sheriffs have a lot to do, so I wouldn't be surprised of the information hasn't been reviewed by legal counsel in twenty or more years. Remember, your sheriff is the most powerful LEO in your area - stay on the right side if at all possible.

[NavyLCDR]

The ONLY states that either require concealment or do not allow carrying a firearm at all are TX, OK, AR, IL, FL, SC, NY and DC. All other 42 states allow open carry. Some of those remaining 42 states do require some form of carry permit to open carry. You happen to be mistaken regarding TN requiring concealment. Feel free to prove me wrong by posting a statute in any of the other 42 states not listed.

For instance, TN statute:

http://www.michie.com/tennessee/lpExt.dll?f=templates&eMail=Y&fn=main-h.htm&cp=tncode/1203e/12a89/12de8

39-17-1307. Unlawful carrying or possession of a weapon. —

(a) (1) A person commits an offense who carries with the intent to go armed a firearm, a knife with a blade length exceeding four inches (4²), or a club.

39-17-1308. Defenses to unlawful possession or carrying of a weapon. —

(a) It is a defense to the application of § 39-17-1307 if the possession or carrying was:

(1) Of an unloaded rifle, shotgun or handgun not concealed on or about the person and the ammunition for the weapon was not in the immediate vicinity of the person or weapon;

(2) By a person authorized to possess or carry a firearm pursuant to § 39-17-1315 or § 39-17-1351;

39-17-1351. Handgun carry permits. —

(a) The citizens of this state have a right to keep and bear arms for their common defense; but the general assembly has the power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (r), any resident of Tennessee who is a United States citizen or permanent lawful resident, as defined by § 55-50-102, who has reached twenty-one (21) years of age, may apply to the department of safety for a handgun carry permit. If the applicant is not prohibited from purchasing or possessing a firearm in this state pursuant to § 39-17-1316 or § 39-17-1307(b), 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), or any other state or federal law, and the applicant otherwise meets all of the requirements of this section, the department shall issue a permit to the applicant.

Notice that in TN it is a Handgun Carry Permit, and there is no requirement to conceal.

[danprkr]

If you can reference the specific state laws in your response that should have the best effect.

Better yet ask the sheriff to cite the specific law(s) that prohibit this. Then when he can't gently point out the 'mistakes' in his letter, and ask him to correct them.

[Sam1911]

This is not terribly uncommon for whatever reason. My county Sheriff (Adams Co.) gave out a similar sheet with some slight differences.

[oldbear]

Is it possible that the Pa. laws have recently changed, regarding CCW in bars? Is it possible that the county has “home rule” status, (the ability to enact laws stricter than state laws?) If not write a letter, “in a calm and collected manner” to the sheriff explaining the error in his hand out and suggest that this error be removed from any further information that his office gives to the public.

[hardluk1]

zebool Why not contact the lawrence county DA and talk to him. And there ain't no use in getting all worked up. It ain't gona help fix anything. Remember too, sheriffs are mostly elected for there ablity to manage in larger counties and many have not even been a road afficer of any kind. Hard to know everthing and maybe someone put this paper together for the sheriff dept. and it was rubber stamped and not caught and sent out.

[Mousegun]

When you disagree with Navy LT.

He'll prove you wrong, just wait and see.

It's hard to find knowledge much better.

Because he got his S-------------------tuff together.

[Sam1911]

Is it possible that the Pa. laws have recently changed, regarding CCW in bars? Is it possible that the county has “home rule” status, (the ability to enact laws stricter than state laws?)

Nope. We have state preemption.

If not write a letter, “in a calm and collected manner” to the sheriff explaining the error in his hand out and suggest that this error be removed from any further information that his office gives to the public.


This is a good idea. No guarantee that you'll get much response, but worth a try. You might need to follow up by requesting a meeting with him.

If I remember correctly, my local Sheriff had worded his handout in such a way that he didn't directly say that it was illegal to carry in bars, etc -- just that you "shouldn't." I don't care for a law enforcement official handing out advice based on his opinions and personal practices, but you might find that's just what he's doing.

[NavyLCDR]

When you disagree with Navy LT.

He'll prove you wrong, just wait and see.

It's hard to find knowledge much better.

Because he got his S-------------------tuff together.

I just have a few things going for me: a pretty boring and easy job (at the moment), good reading skills, Ninja-like google-fu, and a fast internet connection. :D

[Deanimator]

A cop SHOULD know the laws in their jurisdiction but there so many laws that it is common for an officer to not know them all, even a Sheriff.
Try and use that excuse the next time YOU get cited for something.

"Gee officer, I didn't KNOW that it was unlawful to carry into a liquor serving establishment in Ohio!"

See you in jail.


It's a license, NOT a permit.
As noted, the word "concealed" appears nowhere on it.

[heron]

Just remember, prosecutors like to drag out the "ignorance of the law is no excuse" ploy. I'm sure they'll apply that to civilians a lot quicker than they will to LEO.

I'd contact the DA's office on this.

[NavyLCDR]

In WA we have a coercion statute. If a public officer attempts to coerce you from engaging in an activity which you have a right to engage in using their influence or "color of law" as a threat, it is a gross misdemeanor.

[geekWithA.45]

The Delaware county sheriff sends around an equally inaccurate brochure.

I just laugh at him, because I know better.

IMO, the sheriff's tri-fold brochure is not a hill worth taking or a flag worth dying under.

[NavyLCDR]

IMO, the sheriff's tri-fold brochure is not a hill worth taking or a flag worth dying under.

Why not? It would appear to be a law enforcement officer attempting to enforce their personal opinions upon persons under color of law. My personal feeling is that those things don't affect me, because I know better, I research the laws, but what about Joe Average citizen who is going to take the sheriff's incorrect information as law? My feeling is that we have enough legitimate laws and regulations to abide by and it's worth fighting to remove those that aren't legitimate, AND in most cases in violation of preemption and coercion statutes.

That being said, it's easier in Washington since we have strong preemption, unlicensed open carry, and a shall issue CPL.

[Sam1911]

That being said, it's easier in Washington since we have strong preemption, unlicensed open carry, and a shall issue CPL.

Uhhh... just like PA? :)

[AirForceShooter]

Send a copy of the Sheriff's letter to the county attorney and gently point out where it is incorrct and ask he/she advise the sheriff of what the law is.
County attorneys hate law suits. Especially one's they know they'll lose

AFS

[geekWithA.45]

It would appear to be a law enforcement officer attempting to enforce their personal opinions upon persons under color of law.

My point is that is ISN'T a LEO *enforcing* personal opinions.

If the sheriff had gone on a rampage arresting people for carrying in places where it's lawful to do so, THAT is enforcing a personal opinion...and no sheriff in PA is doing that. If they were, I'd be the first to fund the lawsuit.

If anything, it's disseminating incorrect information/misinformation in an official capacity, which is relatively minor in the scheme of things.

what about Joe Average citizen who is going to take the sheriff's incorrect information as law?

What about him?

Isn't it his responsibility to know the law? Just like you & I?

Caveat emptor, and all that?

One of the reasons PA doesn't have a training requirement is because we take seriously the premise that being armed is a right, which comes with the responsibility of competence. I file knowing what your rights are, independent of what some tainted authority figure tells you under that category.

Let's say Joe Normal takes the sheriff @ his word. The harm is minimal: he'll lock his gun in his trunk before going to the airport or bar, or actually conceal his gun instead of alarming the public. Big whoop.

Everyone has to pick their battles, and the choice of windmills to tilt at is a personal one.

[franconialocal]

Guess how much training the NH police academy gives on the in's and out's of pistol/revolver lic. (NH's version of a CCW permit)??? None, zilch, zip, nada. The ONLY reason I'm "up to speed" on the laws for my patrol is because I'm very pro 2A and an NRA lifer and I've done my homework. I even had to go so far as to train our prosecutor!!

There are some general rules on the back of the application but they are really just the tip of the iceberg, as it were, to the extent of the rules in play. I would encourage my fellow brothers/sisters everywhere to take the time it would take to get to know the basics at least as they apply in the area they cover. Luckly NH is still very pro 2A and the rules are very basic. I'm not sure what other states academy's provide for training in this area, but in NH it's pretty lax. I guess the academy just expects the recruits to suppliment this training back at the PD's when they are in the FTO training stage.

[NavyLCDR]

Send a copy of the Sheriff's letter to the county attorney and gently point out where it is incorrct and ask he/she advise the sheriff of what the law is.
County attorneys hate law suits. Especially one's they know they'll lose

AFS

That is a fantastic idea! Sort of the same thing happened when my ex-wife and I went to our local sheriff's office to apply for our CPLs. The lady behind the counter told my ex-wife she had to change her driver's license to WA. I got home and sent an email to the Sheriff stating what the counter person had said and pointed to the Washigton Administrative Code containing the correct informaiton. The sheriff wrote back and thanked me for informing him and that he would correct his employee's misinformation.

It just really bugs me that we have enough real statutes and regulations when persons, especially public officials, make up more that don't exist.

[ZeBool]

I'm going be in contact with them no later than thursday of next week due to my class finals schedule. I'm considering making the trip down there in person, as I have always found
that speaking with someone directly is inherently more effective. Failing a positive encounter with them, I will be sending copies to most of the aforementioned suggestions. I would like to thank everyone for sharing their knowledge and opinion by taking the time to post.

[chieftain]

That being said, it's easier in Washington since we have strong preemption, unlicensed open carry, and a shall issue CPL.

NavyLt, I understand that the Mayor of Seattle ain't impressed with the states preemeption law though? How is that fight coming?

Thankful that I live in Arizona. We ain't perfect but we do pretty good with the gun issues. Now Drug cartels, illegal aliens............ not so good, and a strong reason to be armed here.

Go figure.

Fred

[NavyLCDR]

NavyLt, I understand that the Mayor of Seattle ain't impressed with the states preemeption law though? How is that fight coming?

From Feb. 12, 2010:

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/415368_gun12.html

The law has sided with the gun rights advocates who took the city of Seattle and former Mayor Greg Nickels to court over the city's gun ban.

King County Superior Court Judge Catherine Shaffer on Friday ruled in favor of the Second Amendment Foundation, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Washington Arms Collectors, National Rifle Association and five individual plaintiffs, declaring the city of Seattle's gun ban at public places is in direct violation of Washington state's firearm pre-emption law.

In issuing the ruling, Shaffer wrote, "Seattle's Department of Parks and Recreation's Rule/Policy Number P 060-8.14 ("Firearms Rule") violates Washington law and on that basis, is null and void."

The city has been ordered to remove all signage banning weapons from public areas within 30 days.

[lambertiana]

Does PA law allow the issuing authority to add restrictions? That is the case in California. The sheriff added a restriction to my permit to expressly forbid carry in schools, which is allowed under state law. CA law specifically allows additional restrictions by the issuing authority.

[geekWithA.45]

Does PA law allow the issuing authority to add restrictions?

No.

Because in PA, the right to "The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned. "

[tkaction]

Pa. really is one of the best states for a ccw. There are almost no restrictions on where to carry. It is greatly overlooked when gun talk comes up probably because its has been a blue state. The NRA is HUGE here and a lot of blue legislators are gun people. I believe the Sheriff in question here also is mistaken in asking for 2 references from people who live in the county. I believe that no such residency requirement is needed to supply a reference for the applicant.

[tkaction]

Examples of pa. carry to compare your state to.
open carry allowed with no license(except car)
Bar and church carry OK
Campus carry is legal(may get you kicked out)
No firearm signs carry no legal weight.(you can ignore it)
The actual school restriction may not exclude ccw.(it states you may carry for lawful purpose, whatever that means. I am not going to test it however)
The only restrictions are courthouses and federal buildings.
Only states that dont require permits are better.
And you can ride your motorcycle in the morning and snowmobile in the afternoon. We really do have 2 seasons at the same time.

[ZeBool]

Not to derail my own thread, but I too agree that there shouldn't be any references involved. When you think about it, it's really quite pointless. Say I put my buddy down as a reference, not knowing that secretly he has a grudge against me. The Sheriff department calls him and asks about my character. Buddy replies "heck no he shouldn't carry a gun, he is a real clown!"

Last I checked there is no law on the books making clownship a crime, and I still get the permit.

[tkaction]

They sheriff stated that the references needed to live in the county. I dont believe that that is legal. How would out of staters apply if they dont live here or know anyone. This guy is making it up as he goes.

[Sam1911]

They sheriff stated that the references needed to live in the county. I dont believe that that is legal. How would out of staters apply if they dont live here or know anyone. This guy is making it up as he goes.

My references all lived in southern MD as I didn't know anyone in the area when I moved.

[sert01]

Hey ZeBool. I'm just to the north of New Castle in Pulaski. I've had a Pa. CCW for years. I don't know for sure but the Pa. LCB (liquor control board ) might have something to do with carrying in bars. I don't really know for sure though. I still carry anyways. A good friend of mine, T.W., ran against Perry in the last election and was barely beaten. Don't really know if he's going to run again, but he is as pro carry, 2nd amendment, as they come. Might want to keep that in mind and tell some friends if he runs again. Sert01

[ZeBool]

Sert, the lcb doesn't set the rules for carry. To my knowledge there isn't anything in PA law that states that you CAN carry into a bar, but there isn't anything that states you CANNOT. There is a specific list of off-limit places such as k-12 schools, federal facilities, etc... No where on that list does it have bar or liquor-serving establishment. When the law is silent it is legal.

BTW we both live in the same town. Are you by chance our constable?

[sert01]

No, I'm not the local constable. I live right by the elementary school in Pulaski. The place with the Howard Hanna sign in the front yard. I think I have my place sold. Signed the papers last week. Gonna miss it here. I've lived on the property since 1986. Pa. game lands 200 yards from my back door to the south of me and the Shenango river to fish and canoe in 300 yards to the west of me. Place is just to much for me with the medical condition I'm in. Just renewed my CCW last spring and didn't have a problem. I know several retired and active duty State Police so that certainly doesn't hurt for references!!

[sert01]

ZeBool,, often wondered what the school thought when I would be carrying ak's, sks's, L1A1's, etc out to my truck on my way to Fur-Fin-Feather to shoot. Never had a problem though. I grew up here and everyone around here (I hope!!) knows that I'm one of the "good guys"!!

[CZ223]

Thanks a bunch for sending Mike Chitwood to Maine for a bunch of years.:fire: We have open Carry here in Maine but, if you went into Portland carrying openly, you would be arrested and your gun would be confiscated. If you were pulled over for any reason and the officer found you carrying with a CCW, they were under orders to confiscate your gun. Try getting the gun back. I was advised by one of the best attorneys around, were this to happen to me, I would be better off just buying a new gun. It would cost more in lawyers fees than it was worth. Apparently, he would go to the mat on this every time. I am glad he is gone.

[Prince Yamato]

8 states is not most. TX, OK, AR, IL, FL, SC, NY and DC are the only 8 states (and DC isn't even a state!) for which your statement is true.

Actually, NY allows bar carry. NY actual has very few restrictions if you live in a county that gives you an unrestricted license.

[SSN Vet]

Buddy replies "heck no he shouldn't carry a gun, he is a real clown!"

but if your buddy says "I didn't know he was out of re-hab already" I suspect you'll find it may bear on the approval process.

I have no problem with the reference requirement...

there are actually people out there who can't find a single person to stand up and say "he's an o.k. guy"..... and if they can't get anyone on the planet to speak well of them, there's probably a pretty good reason, which will wiggle it's way up to the light of day once someone starts pulling ths string.

[Acera]

there are actually people out there who can't find a single person to stand up and say "he's an o.k. guy"..... and if they can't get anyone on the planet to speak well of them, there's probably a pretty good reason, which will wiggle it's way up to the light of day once someone starts pulling ths string.

Since when did not having any vocal friends, or acquaintances become a legitimate reason to deny a person a right??

You can be the biggest <jerk> in the entire world, but if there is zero legal justification/reason you should not carry, then you should not be denied the permit.

Too many LEO's want to make it a popularity contest, or a "who you know" type of thing, that is a travesty of justice.

Base it on what a unlawful actions a person has been convicted of in the past, not what they may or may not, in your opinion, do in the future.

We should not have to prove we are innocent and law abiding, it should be assumed until proved otherwise.

[NavyLCDR]

Since when did not having any vocal friends, or acquaintances become a legitimate reason to deny a person a right??

I absolutely agree. I am military and I move every three years. I am also not very social outside of working hours. For my top secret clearance I had to come up with references that knew me at each of the places I have lived in the past 15 years. That was extremely hard to do since most of my friends were military and they moved on and I moved on.

The only reference that should be required to carry a gun is the fact that the government or a jury feels you are safe enough to walk the public streets. I don't think that, constitutionally, even persons with criminal records should be denied firearms rights. The government says you are safe enough to walk the street, that should be enough. Only those people actually incarcerated should have their firearms rights denied. IMHO.

[Freedom_fighter_in_IL]

The government says you are safe enough to walk the street, that should be enough. Only those people actually incarcerated should have their firearms rights denied. IMHO

Rarely do I disagree with you Navy but on that one I have to STRONGLY disagree with. People with violent histories that have already PROVEN that they can not control themselves should not be allowed gun ownership. At least not handgun. Granted there are folks who hunt with handguns (me being one of them) but 95% or more of the handguns out there were bought for defense purposes and I am sorry but violent history felons to me are the LAST people I want to have handguns. As far as the rest, have at it. Innocent until proven guilty.

[PA Curmudgeon]

ZeBool, I skimmed and haven't seen it mentioned yet, but this link is something you may wish to download and print out for your trip to the Sheriff's office. It is the 2009 MPOETC (Municipal Police Officers’ Education & Training Commission) update. I'm sure they have one for 2010, but this one specifically advises on the Uniform Firearms Act in chapter 9, starting at page 45.

http://www.lildobe.net/PAFOA_Docs/MPOTEC_LEGAL_UPDATE_2009-201.pdf

Although it does not address all the issues in your OP, it does cover some, as well as the notion that he really ought to know better.

I believe the misinformation campaign is common throughout PA. I get the same basic stuff from the York County Sheriff, even though our guy is really pretty good about 2A issues and the LTCF. The higher you get in the chain of command, the more political they guys get, and it almost always seems to work against us.

Good on you for following up, and good luck. ;)

[NavyLCDR]

People with violent histories that have already PROVEN that they can not control themselves should not be allowed gun ownership.

IMHO, a law prohibiting a person from possessing or obtaining a firearm is only going to stop the person who is willing to abide by that law from obtaining one. And if the person is willing to abide by the law which prohibits them from obtaining a firearm, than why would they not be willing to abide by the law that prohibits them from unlawfully using the firearm?

Aren't knives used to kill people by criminals or commit robberies/muggings with? Is it OK for a felon to walk into Wal Mart and buy a complete set of knives without any background check or any prohibitions?

[Sam1911]

Pssssst... hey, guys: This is a thread about PA carry laws and the local sheriffs. Let's go have the "should felons have their gun rights reestablished debate in another thread, ok.?

[Acera]

Only those people actually incarcerated should have their firearms rights denied. IMHO.

Might change a few things for the good if those people were mandated to have handguns.:neener:




Sorry Sam, no more hijacking.................