The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,004 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Here is one you can comment on if you choose. I guess this editor thinks this is another one of those loopholes like the famous gun show loophole?
http://www.publicopiniononline.com/ci_15398301

EDITORIAL: Closing loophole in Pennsylvania law on gun permits is all about safety for all
Public Opinion Online


Mail order can be a wonderful thing, but it's not such a good idea when it comes to acquiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Under a loophole in state law, Pennsylvanians who are denied a concealed-carry permit by their local sheriff can order one by mail from Florida.

This is due to a reciprocity agreement with Florida -- many states have them -- intended to allow out-of-state residents who have concealed firearms permits to bring their guns into Pennsylvania while visiting, and vice-versa. It's not intended to allow Pennsylvania residents who have been denied a concealed-carry permit to get one from Florida.

There's a sensible effort under way in the Pennsylvania Legislature to close this loophole.

Personally, we feel that allowing more people to carry concealed weapons in local communities without prior local review cannot be a good idea. This can be confirmed with even a cursory reading of the daily police log in Public Opinion.

Allowing well-trained, mentally stable people with clean records to carry concealed weapons for genuine safety reasons is not a problem. It's their opposites that are a worry -- and sorting them out prior to granting approval to carry a hidden gun is something Pennsylvania residents have tasked their local sheriffs with doing.

Under Pennsylvania law, a "character clause" gives local sheriffs and police officials the authority to deny a permit if they know the applicant is regularly in trouble with the law.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And that's what this flap is really all about -- it gripes the gun-obsessed to no end that a legal authority can decide whether a person may carry a concealed weapon.

"Any law-abiding citizen in Pennsylvania has a right to carry a loaded firearm without interference from state officials," Erich Pratt, spokesman for national organization Gun Owners of America, said last week. "But this legislation (to close the Florida loophole) would put unconstitutional restrictions upon that right."

Now it's true that Pennsylvania sheriffs can arbitrarily deny permits -- but permit denials or revocations can be appealed, and sheriffs who abuse their powers can be voted out of office.

Assuming that the character clause is in fact problematic, the proper solution would be to fix it. Those who oppose it should have the guts to build a convincing public case for redefining the character clause or doing away with it entirely.

But forget crying about losing the "right" to use a sneaky backdoor maneuver to get around current law. Meanwhile, lawmakers should close the Florida loophole.

-- Becky Bennett is the editor of Public Opinion and a member of the editorial board.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,064 Posts
Yeah,right. I'm sure all the local police logs are just full of incidents involving law abiding citizens getting into trouble with their concealed carry permits. What a crock. Getting the guns "off the streets" should focus on criminals...not infringing on the good guys' rights to defend their homes and families.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,510 Posts
Personally, we feel that allowing more people to carry concealed weapons in local communities without prior local review cannot be a good idea. This can be confirmed with even a cursory reading of the daily police log in Public Opinion.
The author lost any credibility or objectivity she may have had, with that one paragraph. If she cannot tell the difference between those "allowed" to carry and those who carry illegally, she ought to find something else to write about.

With thousands in my area possessing LTCs, there have been very few incidents where any of them ran afoul of the law here. Most such incidents involved someone that felt threatened, displaying their pistol as a means of showing the other person that they were (legally) armed and not an easy target for further threatening actions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,683 Posts
I cant remember the last time anyone was even mentioned in the P.O. that got into trouble for carrying. This nitwit is about as loony as Matthew Majors.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top