I would request you define the term school you used. There is a world of difference between an elementary/secondary school, and a college or other post secondary school.
Printable View
I would request you define the term school you used. There is a world of difference between an elementary/secondary school, and a college or other post secondary school.
Right - the family member exception to transfer included all manner of transfers, incuding sales for money.
Folks can also move into PA with their handguns, and they can inherit handguns without ther ever being any record of the transfer - hence, the PSP database of transfers is essentially meaningless.
And strange but true, a non-prohibited PA resident who buys a handgun in PA without being covered by an exception or going thru a dealer/Sheriff breaks no law.
Which states will allow an eighteen year old non-resident to apply for an LTCF that are reciprocal with Pennsylvania?
All of this brings a question to me. If I were to purchase a handgun and then soon after gift it to my 19y.o., is that a straw purchase? To be explict, I'd be buying it with the intention of gifting it to my daughter. BTW, this is hypothetical.
Like I said, someone smarter than me will set everyone straight......
A couple questions were asked, can't remember who but here's the answers: My 18 year old daughter is still in high school, my concern is for her going for a walk where she lives, a rural area.
I'll type out the answer to the letter I received from the Westmoreland County D.A.s office dated 12-11-07.
"I am in receipt of your letter of November 29, 2007 inquiring whether a person properly licensed to carry a firearm may carry a firearm onto school property.
I could not immediately find precedent addressing the issue. Consequently, each decision to prosecute a case is based on the unique facts and circumstances of the case itself. Therefore, this Office cannot offer an advisory opinion that assesses future conduct since*((typo in the origional letter) as criminal since the facts and circumstances of the particular case are unknown.
However, I offer the following: Section 912 porvides a general prohibition against the possession of weapons on school property. Section 912 specifically prohibits the possession of a firearm on school property and further provides that "It shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose." Therefore, the fact that one is properly licensed to carry a firearm does not grant one the right to carry the firearm onto school property. Such an interpretation nullifies the purpose of the statute which is to specifically prohibit the possession of a firearm on school property. In other words, although one may be licensed to carry a firearm, Section 910*((typo in origional letter), nonetheless, prohibits the possession of a firearm on school property except for limited circumstances."
I take this to mean that even if you have a License To Carry, you're illegal if you get caught carrying on school property. However, if one IS carrying and the school were to come under an attack, and you feel compelled to respond with deadly force then you might either get No Billed by a Grand Jury or be found not guilty if the case went to trial.
My only question here and now remains as I first asked. I do appreciate all the responses, thanks.
Ah, ok. Yes, the elementary or secondary schools are generally prohibited under 912.
The defense you listed is something both people seem unwilling to be the test case for and courts seem unwilling to convict for, absent other criminal activity. IOW, I can't find any *conclusive* case law.
Presumably, since there is NO "exceptions" in 912, the presence of an affirmative defense is how police officers carry on school grounds.
But if you search the board here you'll find a number of discussions on this topic. Long story short: Nobody is really sure.
What's confusing for me isn't so much what the law says, but what it doesn't address that seems to be open to interpretation. I only used the example from AZ as a point of interest. To be specific, I asked a nephew, who's an AZ DPS Trooper, how one goes about open carry when it's cold outside and one is wearing a coat. He told me that so long as the handgun is carried in a holster on the belt, as opposed to being just stuck in the waistband or in a pocket, it's considered visible even if it's completely covered by a coat. I know this isn't the law here in PA, which is why I said it's merely a point of reference.