could "printing" be considered a crime in any way?

[Siobhra]

I belong to a group of history buffs that re-enact the Middle Ages. At a public event held by the Township we were holding a fighting demo. I was standing there in full armor answering questions from the public when someone asked if we ever get in trouble with the police for carrying swords. I told her no one I know has had any trouble with the police over their swords. I went on to say that in the State of Pennsylvania the open carry of a handgun is legal so why would a sword be any different? A police officer that was standing near by said you need a license to carry. I said "only to carry concealed open does not require any license". He said he would arrest anyone he caught and he would make it stick.

Later he got me aside and said if he could not get me for that he would find enough 'other' things to get me on if I wore open.

[God's Country]

Originally Posted by Siobhra

I belong to a group of history buffs that re-enact the Middle Ages. At a public event held by the Township we were holding a fighting demo. I was standing there in full armor answering questions from the public when someone asked if we ever get in trouble with the police for carrying swords. I told her no one I know has had any trouble with the police over their swords. I went on to say that in the State of Pennsylvania the open carry of a handgun is legal so why would a sword be any different? A police officer that was standing near by said you need a license to carry. I said "only to carry concealed open does not require any license". He said he would arrest anyone he caught and he would make it stick.

Later he got me aside and said if he could not get me for that he would find enough 'other' things to get me on if I wore open.

As stated earlier. Some LEO'S live in denial. It never ceases to amaze me how many,if not most, cops feel it is there job to interpret the law rather then enforce the law. Police want to be respected. They receive good pay and benefits, and these days, are well educated. Yet seem to resent our right to protect ourselves.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when push comes to shove hasn't it been established that the main job of law enforcement is to do just that, enforce not protect.
That being true any LEO'S objection to open carry (or any type) is proof of his or her arrogance.

[Steve in PA]

Originally Posted by Siobhra

I belong to a group of history buffs that re-enact the Middle Ages. At a public event held by the Township we were holding a fighting demo. I was standing there in full armor answering questions from the public when someone asked if we ever get in trouble with the police for carrying swords. I told her no one I know has had any trouble with the police over their swords. I went on to say that in the State of Pennsylvania the open carry of a handgun is legal so why would a sword be any different? A police officer that was standing near by said you need a license to carry. I said "only to carry concealed open does not require any license". He said he would arrest anyone he caught and he would make it stick.

Later he got me aside and said if he could not get me for that he would find enough 'other' things to get me on if I wore open.

LEO's like that are idiots. And I can say that since I'm a LEO myself

[rwilson452]

IF an LEO did bust you for "something" after making sucha statement, could that LEO be charged under 5301?

[Lougotzz]

I have been doing a lot of reading on open carry here in PA. There are things I like about it and things I dont. I prefer the element of surprise. I think if someone is going to open carry bring the uniform firearms act with them and have a copy of the 2 Supream court cases that states open carry to be legal without a permit. I think the 2 casesd are commonwealth vs. ortiz and commonwealth vs. hawkins.

This was posted on another site about open carry. It was posted by one of our members here.

In PA we already have a multiple supreme court rulings to fall back on!

Open Carry Legal in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Hawkins
In all parts of Pennsylvania, persons who are licensed may carry concealed firearms. 18 Pa.C.S. § 6108. *Except in Philadelphia, firearms may be carried openly without a license*. See Ortiz v. Commonwealth, ___ Pa. ___, ___, 681 A.2d 152, 155 (1996) (*only in Philadelphia must a person obtain a license for carrying a firearm whether it is unconcealed or concealed; in other parts of the Commonwealth, unconcealed firearms do not require a license*). The Commonwealth takes the radical position that police have a duty to stop and frisk when they receive information from any source that a suspect has a gun. Since it is not illegal to carry a licensed gun in Pennsylvania,4 it is difficult to see where this shocking idea originates, notwithstanding the Commonwealth's fanciful and histrionic references to maniacs who may spray schoolyards with gunfire and assassins of public figures who may otherwise go undetected. Even if the Constitution of Pennsylvania would permit such invasive police activity as the Commonwealth proposes -- which it does not -- such activity seems more likely to endanger than to protect the public. Unnecessary police intervention, by definition, produces the possibility of conflict where none need exist.* Contrary to the Commonwealth's view, the public will receive its full measure of protection by police who act within the restraints imposed on them by Art. I, § 8 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania and this court's relevant case law. Upon receiving unverified information that a certain person is engaged in illegal activity, the police may always observe the suspect and conduct their own investigation. If police surveillance produces a reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct, the suspect may, of course, be briefly stopped and questioned (the Terry investigative stop),

Commonwealth v. Ortiz
53 Pa.C.S. section 13133. Philadelphia appellants assert that they are limited by the acts of the General Assembly only if those acts are applicable in the entire commonwealth, and the firearms statute is not. In particular, they argue that in Philadelphia County, the legislature requires that a person must be licensed to carry weapons openly and not concealed from sight,*

18 Pa.C.S. section 6108, [footnote 1] whereas in all other counties of Pennsylvania, *weapons may be carried openly without a license*, 18 Pa.C.S. section 6106. [footnote 2]\



Only the Issuing Authority has the Right to Confiscate a Pennsylvania LTCF

§ 6109. Licenses

Revocation.--A license to carry firearms may be revoked by the issuing authority for good cause. A license to carry firearms shall be revoked by the issuing authority for any reason stated in subsection (e)(1) which occurs during the term of the permit. Notice of revocation shall be in writing and shall state the specific reason for revocation. Notice shall be sent by certified mail, and, at that time, a copy shall be forwarded to the commissioner. An individual whose license is revoked shall surrender the license to the issuing authority within five days of receipt of the notice. An individual whose license is revoked may appeal to the court of common pleas for the judicial district in which the individual resides. An individual who violates this section commits a summary offense.

LTCF Only Required if Carrying Concealed or in a Vehicle

§ 6106. Firearms not to be carried without a license.

(a) Offense defined.--Any person who carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license under this chapter commits a felony of the third degree.



Possible Penalty for Police Actions against a citizens lawful possession of firearms

§ 5301. Official oppression.
A person acting or purporting to act in an official capacity or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity commits a misdemeanor of the second degree if, knowing that his conduct is illegal, he: subjects another to arrest, detention, search, seizure, mistreatment, dispossession, assessment, lien or other infringement of personal or property rights; or denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power or immunity.



Terroristic threats/Disorderly conduct not applicable to lawful open carrying of a firearm

§ 2706. Terroristic threats.

(a) Offense defined. A person commits the crime of terroristic threats if the person communicates, either directly or indirectly, a threat to: commit any crime of violence with intent to terrorize another; cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation; or otherwise cause serious public inconvenience, or cause terror or serious public inconvenience with reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience.

(e) Definition.--As used in this section, the term "communicates" means conveys in person or by written or electronic means, including telephone, electronic mail, Internet, facsimile, telex and similar transmissions.

§ 5503. Disorderly conduct.

(a) Offense defined.--A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he: engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior; makes unreasonable noise; uses obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.



Legitimate purpose to open or conceal carry a firearm: Section 21. The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.