READ FIRST: Where you CAN and CANNOT Carry weapons in the State of Pennsylvania

[LittleRedToyota]

if you have a PA LTCF, you are exempted from the entire *federal* gun free school zones act.

the PA law is:

§912. Possession of Weapon on School Property.

(a) Definition.—Notwithstanding the definition of “weapon” in section 907 (relating to possessing instruments of crime), “weapon” for purposes of this section shall include but not be limited to any knife, cutting instrument, cutting tool, nun-chuck stick, firearm, shotgun, rifle and any other tool, instrument or implement capable of inflicting serious bodily injury.

(b) Offense defined.—A person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree if he possesses a weapon in the buildings of, on the grounds of, or in any conveyance providing transportation to or from any elementary or secondary publicly-funded educational institution, any elementary or secondary private school licensed by the Department of Education or any elementary or secondary parochial school.

(c) Defense—It shall be a defense that the weapon is pos*sessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose.

notice that there is no distinction between "secure" areas and non-secure areas.

however, also notice that subsection (c) says it shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed for a lawful purpose.

legally carrying for self-defense is a lawful purpose.

[PeteG]

Originally Posted by LittleRedToyota

however, also notice that subsection (c) says it shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed for a lawful purpose.

legally carrying for self-defense is a lawful purpose.

I would not bet my house and freedom on that defense.

The theory that self-defense is a "lawful purpose" was not, the last time I looked, endorsed or upheld by any court. Lots of gun-rights activists have espoused this theory, but lots of others have said they did not read it that way.

If anyone has more current information (mine is at least a year old) I would like to hear of it.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by PeteG

I would not bet my house and freedom on that defense.

The theory that self-defense is a "lawful purpose" was not, the last time I looked, endorsed or upheld by any court. Lots of gun-rights activists have espoused this theory, but lots of others have said they did not read it that way.

If anyone has more current information (mine is at least a year old) I would like to hear of it.

you are correct, of course. i normally do point out that that defense has not been tested in court. just slipped a bit on this one.

of course, in reality, the language is quite plain and simple and not really legitimately able to be interpreted in any way other than to say that you cannot be convicted of a crime under this section for carrying a firearm in a school if it is possessed for a lawful purpose (which plainly means a purpose that is lawful--i.e., not illegal--and carrying for self-defense is clearly, especially if you have an LTCF, a legal--and, thus, lawful--purpose for possessing a gun).

however, the courts have certainly been known to redefine the english language (e.g., in this case, the court might redefine "lawful" as "official") and just plain ignore what the law actually says in their rulings, so, yeah, i would not want to bet the house on it either.

[Pa. Patriot]

Originally Posted by PeteG

The theory that self-defense is a "lawful purpose" was not, the last time I looked, endorsed or upheld by any court.

So is a constitutional right a "lawful purpose"? (Pennsylvania Constitution, Article 1; Section 21)

Maybe there is no "endorsement" by a court for "self defense" because it is so obvious?

...just thinking out loud again

[headcase]

We may find out for sure this football season........

[LittleRedToyota]

i'm not trying to start an argument, because pete is 100% correct. until the courts rule on this, we don't really know how they will rule (if they can say, for example, the PSP sales database does not fit the definition of "any registry" as it is outlined in the PA UFA, then they are liable to say anything), but just for the intellectual exercise, i went and looked up the legal definition of "lawful" in case it differs from the common definition.

according to black's law dictionary, the definition is:

Originally Posted by Black's Law Dictionary

LAWFUL. Legal; warranted or authorized by the law; having the qualifications prescribed by law; not contrary to nor forbidden by law.

The principle distinction between the terms "lawful" and "legal" is that the former contemplates the substance of law, the latter the form of law. To say of an act that it is "lawful" implies that it is authorized, sanctioned, or at any rate not forbidden, by law. To say that it is "legal" implies that it is done or performed with the forms and usages of law, or in a technical manner.

carrying a concealed firearm with an LTCF meets every aspect of this definition.

the act is authorized by law.
the person peforming the act has the qualifications prescribed by law.
the act is not contrary to nor forbidden by law.

thus, carrying a concealed gun with an LTCF, is, by definition, a lawful act.

so, i will turn my attention to the phrase "lawful purpose". could a "lawful act" potentially not have a "lawful purpose"? i dunno...possibly.

but the PA use of force laws authorize the use of force (both lethal and not lethal) in self-defense in under certain cirumstances. therefore, it would seem that self-defense is authorized and prescribed by and not contrary to law.

putting these two concepts together, i don't see how one could legitimately conclude that an LTCF holder carrying a concealed gun for self defense is not, by definition, possessing the gun for a "lawful purpose".

possessing the gun is a lawful act, and self-defense is a lawful purpose for that act.

i am, however, not a lawyer. so if pete or any other lawyers would like to school me on this subject, i would be very interested to learn.

(once again, though, i am not naive enough to think that the courts always actually follow the law, so if the answer is simply that "we don't know what the courts will decide until they decide", i also completely understand that.)

[panther76]

Originally Posted by LittleRedToyota

i'm not trying to start an argument, because pete is 100% correct. until the courts rule on this, we don't really know how they will rule ...

In addition to the language of the federal law I was thinking there was something in the PA law that regulates LTCF. That was where I thought I read something further defining the issue related to school zones and specifying under STATE law a restriction for those exempted from Federal "school zone" law. I have searched for it, but can't even find a complete text of the law, though I know I've read it before online somewhere. Anyone else less Google challenged know where to find it?

Otherwise I would fall to my default position on such questions which is to suggest anyone concerned write a letter to Tom Corbets office. I haven't done so, but Mike Fisher's office always responded and gave written statements of their "interpretation" of firearms laws without a lot of B.S.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by panther76

I have searched for it, but can't even find a complete text of the law, though I know I've read it before online somewhere. Anyone else less Google challenged know where to find it?

below is a link to a page that has the PA UFA as well as the PA law regarding carrying weapons on school property (i actually posted that section in a post earlier in this thread).

http://www.acslpa.org/pa_uniform_firearms_act.htm

whatever law you are looking for would be on that page if it exists.

[Pa. Patriot]

I also host a copy of the Uniform Firearms Act (UFA).
Hyperlinked index makes it easier to navigate.

PA Title 18 Chapter 61, subchapter A

Top of Chapter 61

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by Pa. Patriot

I also host a copy of the Uniform Firearms Act (UFA).
Hyperlinked index makes it easier to navigate.

PA Title 18 Chapter 61, subchapter A

Top of Chapter 61

hey pa patriot...

just a suggestion...

i would generally link to your version of the UFA as i think it is more up-to-date than the ACSL's version.

but, the nice thing about the ACSL's version is that they also have other relevant statutes like the one on carrying on school property, use fo force laws, etc.

it would be cool if you put those on your site as well.

again, just a friendly suggestion.