I learned new law today regarding Firearms Carry....

[pex]

Originally Posted by HiredGoon

Looks like it's Title 55, chapter 3270.79
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/055/055toc.html

Says it's given authority by "62 P. S. § § 901—922 and 1001—1087".

I however see nothing about penalties and a lot about licensing in Title 55. Maybe the only penalty is revocation of license. Of course, then the licensee will be on your ass about carrying instead of the gubmint.

[CZ40P]

Let me start by saying that the web site quoted " Legal Community Against Violence" is little more than a mirror of the Brady mantra. In fact it is a Brady site.

I don't care how many obtuse Pennsylvania regulations their lawyers quote in their disingenuous attempt to discourage Pennsylvanians from carrying a gun.
The regulations providing for the licensing and operation of group homes, day care centers, and casinos do NOT provide for an INDIVIDUAL criminal penalty.

I work in the Mental Retardation field. Our agency has strict rules about firearms IN the facility. If I carried to work, and was found out, I would be unemployed but not arrested. The Agency could be penalized by the Dept of Public Welfare, and might loose their license to operate. The penalty is on the Agency not the individual. It is not a criminal offense but an administrative one.

The "Legal Community Against Violence" is just another left wing gun grabbing bunch of elitist assholes tying to hide behind a high sounding name.

Just look at the list of links they endorse. I am surprised the American Communist Party wasn't listed.

You will notice that the pafoa and the NRA are absent. So much for an unbiased opinion.

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

Originally Posted by CZ40P

I work in the Mental Retardation field. Our agency has strict rules about firearms IN the facility. If I carried to work, and was found out, I would be unemployed but not arrested. The Agency could be penalized by the Dept of Public Welfare, and might loose their license to operate. The penalty is on the Agency not the individual. It is not a criminal offense but an administrative one.

OK.....I understand. The penalty comes because one of the agency's employees carried while on the job.

But what If i'm someone NOT affiliated/employed by the agency? let's say my brother is MR and I stop by the group home for a visit and I happen to be CC'ing. There is a surprise inspection during my visit and it is discovered that I am carrying.

What of THAT situation?

I ask because it is related to the nursery school question.....
Nursery school employees or child transporters may not carry (or risk being fired), but what about the parent who just swings by to pick up or drop off?

[MTechnik]

Since this is a regulation not a rule it's kinda like the yellow "warning, this turn coming up is a 35mph turn" warning on the road. It's not breaking the speed limit to go over it, but if you do happen to get into an accident while going above 35, you get no leneincy.

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

Originally Posted by MTechnik

Since this is a regulation not a rule it's kinda like the yellow "warning, this turn coming up is a 35mph turn" warning on the road. It's not breaking the speed limit to go over it, but if you do happen to get into an accident while going above 35, you get no leneincy.

Neat analogy. I like it.

And that analogy would work if I opted to OC in the group home while visiting my MR brother...and either he or another resident successfully executed a gun grab and caused harm. I see how no leniency MAY enters the equation.
BUT.......am I guilty of not following the 'Recommendation' if I cannot see it? Back to the nursery school - the pamphlet was small (Reader's Digest size) with about 75-85 pages. I had to specifically dig to find the blurb about firearms. Shouldn't the 'recommendation' be reasonably posted?

Now - in the MR gun grab scenario - I can maybe see the 'no leniency'.
But in my original example.....I show up for a visit, I'm CC'ing, and somehow I'm found out. "It's not breaking the speed limit to go over it, but if you do happen to get into an accident while going above 35, you get no leniency" - well, As a CC'er, I'm going over the 35mph (the recommendation to not carry firearm).......But I wasn't involved in an incident.

How would that fare for me? If the inspecting agency wanted to, in an uneducated fury, report me to a Sheriff....could my LTCF be in jeopardy?

[CZ40P]

Originally Posted by Gary in Pennsylvania

Neat analogy. I like it.

And that analogy would work if I opted to OC in the group home while visiting my MR brother...and either he or another resident successfully executed a gun grab and caused harm. I see how no leniency MAY enters the equation.
BUT.......am I guilty of not following the 'Recommendation' if I cannot see it? Back to the nursery school - the pamphlet was small (Reader's Digest size) with about 75-85 pages. I had to specifically dig to find the blurb about firearms. Shouldn't the 'recommendation' be reasonably posted?

Now - in the MR gun grab scenario - I can maybe see the 'no leniency'.
But in my original example.....I show up for a visit, I'm CC'ing, and somehow I'm found out. "It's not breaking the speed limit to go over it, but if you do happen to get into an accident while going above 35, you get no leniency" - well, As a CC'er, I'm going over the 35mph (the recommendation to not carry firearm).......But I wasn't involved in an incident.

How would that fare for me? If the inspecting agency wanted to, in an uneducated fury, report me to a Sheriff....could my LTCF be in jeopardy?

It breaks my heart to have to say this, but if you showed up at a group home I worked at, I would have to ask you to stow the gun in your vehicle. At least then the agency would have exercised due diligence towards the regulation. If I asked you to leave and you refused that would be trespassing.Yada Yada Yada. If a report was made, the result would depend on Where you live and if the Sheriff is a dick

I just realized something, we had the police at our group home a few times. I should have made them disarm at the door. The regulation says nothing about police,constables and the like being exempt. Ya I'll bet that would work.