Your WISH List of changes to UFA For Gun Owners benefit and protection

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by fingers80002

Castle Doctrine!!!!!!!!

what do you mean by "castle doctrine"?

we already do not have a duty to retreat inside our homes. so we really already have "castle doctrine".

are you refering to immunity from civil lawsuits as well if you defend yourself in your home? or are you refering to a "stand your ground" law? (frankly, the "with complete safety" part of the current duty to retreat puts us fairly close to stand your ground as well.)

[Philbert]

I would like 6109 amended such that LTCF renewals are not treated as new applications. If you have held an LTCF for five years and haven't caused any trouble, that should be sufficient evidence that you can be issued a license.

I'm not sure how I would edit the statute, I would need to think about that.

[jud4420]

id like to see added to 6106 b11 language that allows the carry of a firearm within a vehicle. Something like..


6106b

(11) Any person while carrying a firearm in any vehicle which, person possesses a valid and lawfully issued license for that firearm which has been issued under the laws of the United States or any other state, or any person while carrying a firearm in any vehicle providing that firearms is clearly displayed in the open.

or something like..

or any person while carrying a firearm in any vehicle providing the firearm is unloaded with ammunition stored in a separate compartment.

[ccphilly1984]

I would really like a law prohibiting companies from regulating the carry of firarms. A way to maybe get this done would be to allow them to regulate the manner in which they are carried (open or concealed). I work in a very bad neighborhood of philadelphia and it is against company policy to carry on the job.

another thing that would be better than nothing would be prohibiting companies from restricting concealed firarms in employees' own personal vehicles as long as they are parked in a publically accesable lot (meaning not behind a guard shack) ... open gates don't count during the day because the public can access them whenever they are open (which with many companies is all day).

i need some help on carry at work. my company as ignored my many requests to get this company policy changed and i have had some near run ins on robberies. I've literally drove up to customers' stores as the theif was running down the street.

[imperialism2024]

Originally Posted by ccphilly1984

I would really like a law prohibiting companies from regulating the carry of firarms. A way to maybe get this done would be to allow them to regulate the manner in which they are carried (open or concealed). I work in a very bad neighborhood of philadelphia and it is against company policy to carry on the job.

another thing that would be better than nothing would be prohibiting companies from restricting concealed firarms in employees' own personal vehicles as long as they are parked in a publically accesable lot (meaning not behind a guard shack) ... open gates don't count during the day because the public can access them whenever they are open (which with many companies is all day).

i need some help on carry at work. my company as ignored my many requests to get this company policy changed and i have had some near run ins on robberies. I've literally drove up to customers' stores as the theif was running down the street.

We already have enough infringements on private property rights. We don't need any more, under the guise of "gun rights". Forcing employers to make accomodations for your firearms habit is no better than forcing employers to pay a certain minimum wage. If you don't like your company's firearms policy, then go find another company for which to work. Or try to change your company's policy.

I work for the US Postal Service as a letter carrier. As such, I am barred from both a policy and a legal standpoint from carrying in my place of employment. So I lock up the gun in the car, and hope that the welfare checks don't come out too late. If all of a sudden my job became more dangerous, I would make the move to another job.

Anyhow, in response to the OP, could we write into the UFA a law that orders Pennsylvania's secession from the Union? That would get rid of the Federal firearms laws, and no one would have to answer to Barack Obama as president.

[tl_3237]

How about a law that would prescribe that a business serving the general public would have absolute liability for injuries to patrons from criminal acts on their premises if that business had a policy prohibiting CC to those with LTCF or equivalent?

This would preserve property rights in that the business still makes the decision as to their firearms policy but establishes an attendant elevated duty of care if they chose to prohibit their patrons from licensed self-defense activities.

PLEASE, no flames from OCers - just being pragmatic. Trying to make the INITIAL attempt at the legislation more palatable because of the hoplophobic tendencies of the sheeple and CC would raise far fewer objections to the legislation.

[fierojimmy]

I've got a few suggestions:

First:

As I understand it, the current "castle doctrine" we have does not provide for immunity from civil damages, and while I think it should be added, I think a more comprehensive approach would be an independent law that provides immunity from civil suits involving injuries sustained while a person is unlawfully trespassing. This would "complete" PA's castle doctrine, while at the same time protecting property owners from liability (not related to home defense) if a trespasser trips on a hole and breaks his leg or falls through the roof when attempting to burglarize the home while the property owner is on vacation, etc.

Second

I would like to see a provision added to the UFA allowing a person without a LTCF to either transport or openly carry a firearm in their vehicle. Either requiring the weapon to be placed on the dashboard or locked in a separate compartment from the driver would seem to be compliant with the intent of the current UFA. Placing it on the dash keeps it readily observable (i.e. carried open) while keeping it locked in a glove box/console or the trunk could not be considered to be "concealed on or about" the driver. Since open carry is legal, without a license, it only seems right to let a person transport their weapon without having to walk everywhere they go.

Third

In concert with the above; I would like to see the UFA clarified with regards to open carry and/or licensing requirements to carry while on a motorcycle, bicycle or horse, as opposed to "in a vehicle" as the current version states.

Fourth

Face to face handgun sales shouldn't need a PICS check. As long as the purchaser isn't known to the seller as a person prohibited from owning a firearm the seller should be free to sell it to them.

Fifth

Any individual who posses a current LTCF shouldn't be subject to a PICS check for firearms purchases. The same standards apply to both, so why the unnecessary duplication?

Sixth

The PSP's handgun transfer database is pointless (especially if Items 4&5 get adopted). It is a waste of taxpayer funds to maintain, seeing as it is incomplete (since not all transfers need to be done through the system). Simply as a matter of trimming the pork from our budget it should be done away with.

Seventh

Licensing:

As has been pointed out already, a uniform licensing/revocation system based upon objective standards is necessary to prevent discrimination/abuses at the local level.

Eighth

An actual "stand your ground" law would be wonderful, "complete safety" may be close, but it still requires retreat be considered before meeting the threat with force.


-----------------------------------------
Now that I've got these down, I'll probably work on a more "governmental" version with actual law changes and everything. Is there a certain format that's preferred?

[rwilson452]

A couple,

Put some teeth in the law. when a sheriff goes above and beyond what the law allows for when processing a LTCF there should be serious sanction for doing so.
Make the penalty for violating sect. 5301 by and LEO serious enough to make them a prohibited person. max of 2 years?

[ccphilly1984]

Originally Posted by tl_3237

How about a law that would prescribe that a business serving the general public would have absolute liability for injuries to patrons from criminal acts on their premises if that business had a policy prohibiting CC to those with LTCF or equivalent?

This would preserve property rights in that the business still makes the decision as to their firearms policy but establishes an attendant elevated duty of care if they chose to prohibit their patrons from licensed self-defense activities.

PLEASE, no flames from OCers - just being pragmatic. Trying to make the INITIAL attempt at the legislation more palatable because of the hoplophobic tendencies of the sheeple and CC would raise far fewer objections to the legislation.

that would work too. If i ever got shot or robbed on the job (and survived of course) i would sue and try to get that through the court system. i'd be more compfortable about having it done through the legislative system.

and i agree with adding a sceeding clause god forbid something happens with a corrupt supreme court and the us constitution becomes in violation of our strong pennsylvania constitution. i'l love to say that my country is pennsylvania.


also florida has the gun in the car law already. i'd apreciate that because it'd make it more convinent to go to the range after work or go to the atm or the bank right after work and feel safer.

[nlcrsn]

All laws removed! any form of gun control, licensing, restrictions. Except violent crimes and criminals!