How would you change an unfair law

[sgser]

In the Gary Young issue (Sticky http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed...evocation.html), how would you change the way the law is written?

You can read the Court Docs. In gnbrotz's post #120 in the above thread.

The law regarding Issuance of license is stated below.

The denial is based on “character and reputation,” the reference to which is also below. And, what will we do if there is an agreement on a change to make this fair to holders of a LTCF? Perhaps we could also get some legal guidance if this is pursued.

And then, once again if pursued and a agreed upon change were to be arrived at, what would be done with it?

18 Pa C.S.A. sec 1609(i) 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) [i] (see below) 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.

18 Pa C.S.A. 1609 e 1 (i) An individual whose character and reputation is such that the individual would be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety.

(j) Immunity.--A sheriff who complies in good faith with this section shall be immune from liability resulting or arising from the action or misconduct with a firearm committed by any individual to whom a license to carry a firearm has been issued.


My suggestion would be to require a full explanation of the character and reputation concerns which lead to the decision to revoke. Another suggestion would be to remove immunity (j) from the official who improperly caused the revocation.

[gnbrotz]

Personally, I'd like to see (e)(1)(i) completely stricken from the law. I've actually discussed this briefly with one of my local Reps. He seemed open to the idea, but said it would be very difficult to accomplish with Rendell in office. Even if we had a receptive Governor, these kind of things don't happen overnight. No reason to not get the ball rolling now.

Additionally, I believe there should be a provision for some type of hearing/determination prior to the mandated surrender of the LTCF. This hearing would not replace the appeal process, but would hopefully head off some of these bogus revocations early, and keep the burden on the Sheriff's to have sufficient proof for their action.

[jofreder]

Personally, I'd like to see (e)(1)(i) completely stricken from the law. I've actually discussed this briefly with one of my local Reps. He seemed open to the idea, but said it would be very difficult to accomplish with Rendell in office. Even if we had a receptive Governor, these kind of things don't happen overnight. No reason to not get the ball rolling now.

Additionally, I believe there should be a provision for some type of hearing/determination prior to the mandated surrender of the LTCF. This hearing would not replace the appeal process, but would hopefully head off some of these bogus revocations early, and keep the burden on the Sheriff's to have sufficient proof for their action.

I agree 100%. Make the Sheriff Explain himself and offer proof and allow us to rebut his assesment.

[NineseveN]

I would just add actual due process with a severe burden of proof on the Sheriff's part to it if I couldn't get it stricken completely.