The Trace and those charged with illegal possession

[Justincase]

I honestly have no idea what to make of this article. I’m not going to share my takeaway yet as I wanna see what you guys think.

In Philadelphia, a Program Offers Some People Arrested for Unlicensed Guns a Second Chance

The initiative is open to those with no prior convictions and whose only crime was having an unlicensed gun. It aims to work around a state law that treats Philadelphians more harshly than other Pennsylvanians.

www.thetrace.org

 

[gun_slinger_boy]

Not gonna read the whole article as I got the gist from the first few paragraphs. I don't think there should be "unlicensed" pistols. That's that I guess.

To further elaborate, if you are able to be on the streets then you should be able to carry a gun. There's this thing called the second amendment after all. If you can't be allowed to carry a gun then you should be in prison. In other words keep people in jail (longer) if you don't feel they are entitled to their rights.

To make this even sillyer, PA is a state that you don't need a permit, license whatever you want to call it, unless you carry concealed. I don't know if it was prior or post 2013 but the whole nonsense of not being able to carry in Philly because it's a class 1 city has been overturned. It's no longer a thing. Ordinance nonsense has also been turned over in PA. You can carry anywhere equally in PA.

 

[Saltwater60]

I like the program because it’s only for having an unlicensed gun and if the gun was used in a crime they aren’t eligible. I too do not think anyone should need a license for a gun.

 

[SomeSoldier]

Licenses only hinder the law abiding. Criminal is going criminal.

 

[Acer-m14]

if your out in public you get the Full 2A .. shall not infringe .. like 29 other states now .. ( still need to get rid of that 4473 ) its unConstitutional anyways ...

if you can't behave in public with a gun then stay in jail or prison ..

 

[Acer-m14]

you need a license to drive a car ..

like hell you do .. you just get in it , turn the key and the motor starts , you put it into gear and push the pedal and off you go ..

 

[jimc]

If PA insists on having a permit to carry concealed, you can get one if you don't have a criminal record and it's only $20. If charging $20 is racist, or disproportionally affects certain groups, THE STATE can lower the cost to $0, or eliminate the permit requirement altogether. What's more equitable than not requiring a permit if you're legally capable of owning a firearm?

 

[spat]

you need a license to drive a car ..

like hell you do .. you just get in it , turn the key and the motor starts , you put it into gear and push the pedal and off you go ..

You only need a license to drive a car *on a public highway*.

I think most gun owners would find it reasonable to require a license to bring your guns to a public range funded by tax dollars. Even if that required some safety training or certification.

As long as shooting at a private range or on private property were treated like driving at a race track or private field anyway.

 

[pshift]

I like it.

 

[OwnTheRide]

I think most gun owners would find it reasonable to require a license to bring your guns to a public range funded by tax dollars. Even if that required some safety training or certification.

Not this gun owner (not that I ever use public ranges). The validity of the comparison between licenses for public roads and licenses for public ranges falls apart when we take the fact that keeping and bearing arms is a fundamental right, but driving is not.

 

[spat]

Not this gun owner (not that I ever use public ranges). The validity of the comparison between licenses for public roads and licenses for public ranges falls apart when we take the fact that keeping and bearing arms is a fundamental right, but driving is not.

Keeping and bearing arms is a fundamental right.

Use of a publicly funded shooting range is not.

It's quite reasonable to require a demonstration of an understanding of basic safety rules before allowing someone on your range.

Plus, the vast majority of ranges I know of are private anyway, so it would be a non issue.

The private ranges usually have a membership and training requirement akin to a license anyway.

 

[Acer-m14]

You only need a license to drive a car *on a public highway*.

do not .. do to .. do not ... do to ... do not ... do to

Legally




PS .. i think if its a Farm Vehicle you don't need a license .. i could be wrong thou

 

[Acer-m14]

Use of a publicly funded shooting range is not.

so that goes for all publicly funded places Schools , Town Hall , the Local Cop Shop too

 

[spat]

so that goes for all publicly funded places Schools , Town Hall , the Local Cop Shop too

Do you need a drivers license to park there ?

 

[Acer-m14]

nope ..

 

[OwnTheRide]

Keeping and bearing arms is a fundamental right.

Use of a publicly funded shooting range is not.

Your original statement was "require a license to bring your guns to a public range [...]'. That reads like requiring a license to bear arms on public property, to which I am adamantly opposed. But here, you're talking about using (presumably firing) at said range. Maybe there is a distinction there. I realize this (using as opposed to bearing) is likely what you meant the entire time. I'm not on board, but do note that your position may be Constitutionally acceptable.

It's quite reasonable to require a demonstration of an understanding of basic safety rules before allowing someone on your range.

On a private range, sure. But as soon as we're talking public ranges, I see a slippery slope forming. Anywhere you might carry a gun, you might use a gun... that's why you're carrying it. So if it's okay to require a license to use a gun on public ranges, then it's not a big logical leap to say it must be okay to require a license to carry a gun in public.

I have in the past expressed support for a mandatory gun safety class in high school, akin to the government-mandated "Participation in Government" class I had to take back in the day.

Plus, the vast majority of ranges I know of are private anyway, so it would be a non issue.

The private ranges usually have a membership and training requirement akin to a license anyway.

Private ranges are a completely different story. This whole discussion is moot, of course... we're already way beyond anything I would consider acceptable.

 

[OwnTheRide]

To make this even sillyer, PA is a state that you don't need a permit, license whatever you want to call it, unless you carry concealed. I don't know if it was prior or post 2013 but the whole nonsense of not being able to carry in Philly because it's a class 1 city has been overturned. It's no longer a thing. Ordinance nonsense has also been turned over in PA. You can carry anywhere equally in PA.

Some correction here: no, you cannot carry anywhere equally in PA, and the whole "cities of the first class" thing still applies. But now PPD understands that open carry is legal in Philadelphia so long as the carrier possesses an LTCF.

1. PA law restricts the concealed carry of firearms, which includes possessing while in a vehicle, unless the person has a valid PA LTCF or qualifies for a handful of other exemptions.
2. PA law is largely silent on the topic of open carry. If the law does not prohibit something, then it is legal.
3. One of the rare exceptions to #2 is contained in PA §6108, which makes it illegal to carry a gun - openly or concealed - in cities of the first class (cities with 1,000,000 or more residents) without a PA LTCF or similar exemption.
4. Thus, open carry was legal in Philly, but only if you had an LTCF.
5. PPD was ignoring this reality, and charging people who were openly carrying, even though they possessed an LTCF and therefore were exempt from the statute.

Mark Fiorino took legal action after repeatedly dealing with PPD's unlawful enforcement of laws, resulting in a the clarification that open carry is allowed in Philadelphia with an LTCF. Here's his account of the saga.