Gun Confiscation in Emergencies

[steelmover]

Did PA ever pass a law prohibiting the govt. from confiscating guns in emergency situations (like Katrina)?

[knight0334]

No. No changes to the UFA since HB1717 was enacted in Nov/Dec 2005(2006?)

[ChamberedRound]

Nope. Just about every pro-gun bill submitted in the last 1-2 years has been stalled in Committee.

[Elmar]

I thought there was a provision that exempted LTCF holders from having confiscations during declared emergencies within the UFA.

[knight0334]

Originally Posted by Elmar

I thought there was a provision that exempted LTCF holders from having confiscations during declared emergencies within the UFA.

There is only a provision that those with LTCF may carry a firearm or long gun during a declared emergency. Its still possible for the grabbers to take them none the less. ...which I'm sure with PA's legislature and high courts would result in being overturned and the gun grabs would have to stop.

[Elmar]

Originally Posted by knight0334

There is only a provision that those with LTCF may carry a firearm or long gun during a declared emergency. Its still possible for the grabbers to take them none the less. ...which I'm sure with PA's legislature and high courts would result in being overturned and the gun grabs would have to stop.

Well obviously they could try to do it against the law but I thought we were talking strictly about legality here which means no they could not take our firearms.

In fact seizing of firearms during an emergency would alert a reasonable individual that those doing the confiscating wish to inflict serious bodily harm possibly leading to death (by denying them the ability to protect themselves in a situation where bodily harm is likely). That would allow the legal resiting with lethal force.

[LittleRedToyota]

HB 1845 would address this issue...as well as the ban on carrying in state parks.

contact your state senators and tell them to pass this bill.

more info in this link:

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/pennsylva...45-page-3.html

and

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed...tml#post403594

[adymond]

Originally Posted by Elmar

Well obviously they could try to do it against the law but I thought we were talking strictly about legality here which means no they could not take our firearms.

In fact seizing of firearms during an emergency would alert a reasonable individual that those doing the confiscating wish to inflict serious bodily harm possibly leading to death (by denying them the ability to protect themselves in a situation where bodily harm is likely). That would allow the legal resiting with lethal force.

While I think you would be right and all I think this would not end well for anyone involved. If you live alone do what you have to do, but I have a wife and child. I would resist, but there is no way I would give them an excuse to use leathal force and either endanger my wife and child or to remove a source of income from them either.

[PA Rifleman]

Originally Posted by Elmar

Well obviously ...those doing the confiscating wish to inflict serious bodily harm possibly leading to death (by denying them the ability to protect themselves in a situation where bodily harm is likely). That would allow the legal resiting with lethal force.

True enough but the descendant of the ends justifying the means rationale is that history's written and judged by the winners. The New Orleans confiscations went unabated (and unresisted) the entire time. When they were called out on the carpet for it later, they ignored the criticism as well as the orders to return the guns. Just like Texas & Idaho in the 90s, no accounting for the incident and only the victims went to jail.

To win this one, the confiscators would need to be deterred by a larger force. I doubt a neighborhood militia would be enough, but the threat of a large government-backed force replete with gunships might do the trick.

[sluggie24]

Originally Posted by adymond

While I think you would be right and all I think this would not end well for anyone involved. If you live alone do what you have to do, but I have a wife and child. I would resist, but there is no way I would give them an excuse to use leathal force and either endanger my wife and child or to remove a source of income from them either.

Don't give them an excuse. Don't even give them a chance..........