local police check.....not recommended? ???

[ungawa]

Thank you .Yes they did not recommend. Criminal history .traffic only dui .short jail time.did not prevent me from purchasing.thnx ..just didn't want to go to sheriff office n get the humiliated .

Can you give us the date, the precise charge you were convicted of, and the grading? Such as Misdemeanor M1/M2/M3 etc. or Felony?

If you actually spent time in jail it's possible the maximum possible sentence (not what you actually did) could have been severe enough to prohibit you from LTCF or even from owning a firearm. Need to figure that out first. Once we know that we can think about what's next.

[Daycrawler]

Thank you .Yes they did not recommend. Criminal history .traffic only dui .short jail time.did not prevent me from purchasing.thnx ..just didn't want to go to sheriff office n get the humiliated .

Ok Waggycat this makes sense to me! It has already been stated you are not required to have the Card completed. You can take the 45 day Punishment for not completing the card and hope you get by the Sheriff. Even if you can purchase, you can still be denied under the character clause. BTW I feel that is BS. If PICS clears you to poses a firearm then IMO you should be good enough. However My opinion and 99 cents will get you a Sweet Tea at Mcdonalds and that's about what is worth! Good luck in your Quest to obtain your LTCF.

[Gun]

I assumed it was Topsy or some other such foolishness, but apparently, some members have better deciphering skills than I do and see this as a serious post. I wonder if this is an age thing? We seem to be getting more posts from young people who impulsively make incoherent posts from their phones, with no consideration of how their posts might be interpreted by others. I guess it boils down to this: is it the poster's responsibility to make some small effort to communicate clearly, or is it our responsibility to accommodate that total lack of effort and decipher everything?

Google the username.

[wagycat]

I just wanna know if it is worth applying to the sheriff after the local check was : not recommended - jail: I am not prohibited from owning a firearm witch a have 2.. if I do if sheriff asks where is the local form is I don't know what u should say so I'm at a crossroads I don't want them to think I'm trying to get a permit when it's not recommended I guess I'll just go up to sheriff office n see what happens !! Just thought someone may have been in same boat..n yes I passed the pics screening 2 months ago ...thnx for the help....

[Gunsnwater]

Thank you .Yes they did not recommend. Criminal history .traffic only dui .short jail time.did not prevent me from purchasing.thnx ..just didn't want to go to sheriff office n get the humiliated .

Wow too funny on every level. The phone has made the written word dead. No offense, but that ^^^^ is humiliating abuse of language. I guess I'm old now.

[Gunsnwater]

Google the username.

48! Too ritch!

[scruff]

48! Too ritch!

Don't you know typos aren't allowed from you and your ilk?

[proformica]

It is the application for the license that triggers the sec. 6109(d) requirements for the sheriff, so how could it be lawful to have any police check card generated prior to the date and time of application? Once application takes place, sec. 6111(i) might even appear to preclude the applicant from disclosing publicly that information, to local police to effect the check for the card, no differently from the sheriff contacting references and stating applicant information in the course of trying to comply with sec. 6109(d). The onus is on the applicant to make the declaration required of him under sec. 6109(c). The onus is on the sheriff or chief, or his designee to do the investigation. Neither applicant nor issuing authority can delegate their responsibilities. The point of 45 days is, here's a chance to find some dirt, but if you pricks can't come up with it in 45 days, you are forced to issue. Remember that the applicant must declare under sec. 6109 that "I authorize the sheriff . . . to inspect only those records or documents relevant . . ." He can go to the police then. It's on him.

If the sheriff issues in 15 minutes with a check card and in 45 days without, he is probably neglecting his duty to perform the investigation under sec. 6109(d) for those with check cards and for those he punishes, he is acting with corrupt or improper motive where he has a discretionary act before him. Both neglect of duty and acting with corrupt or improper motive are misbehavior in office.

I believe police check cards are remnants of the may issue system that placed local police chiefs or burgesses in charge of determining fitness and suitability, issuing the licenses on a single-weapon basis. Apparently as we transitioned to sheriffs, either the chiefs still wanted in on the game or sheriffs felt they retained the infrastructure. Because I am not clear on when the PSP began making it easy to be certain of one's criminal background, maybe it theoretically made sense to check with local police (so long as the sheriff did it). But what contacting the local police does not suitably do, is determine reputation, because to determine reputation requires the knowledge of those specifically in one's community whom have come to be aware of that knowledge, and often local police are not part of that. A local rap sheet is not the evidence of reputation one way or the other. A sheriff has to investigate character and reputation. I realize that the courts, in its outcomes over the past decades, have trivialized the two categories and its conjunction, in most cases not even reasoning the court's statutory construction. In the past 5 years, perhaps even treating it as some term of art meaning 'in some way he's a bad dude maybe', despite that we really do have three clear words there, via the ends make the means analysis. The words are nevertheless still chilling out under sec. 6109(e)(1)(i).

[Rosco the Iroc]

I just wanna know if it is worth applying to the sheriff after the local check was : not recommended - jail: I am not prohibited from owning a firearm witch a have 2.. if I do if sheriff asks where is the local form is I don't know what u should say so I'm at a crossroads I don't want them to think I'm trying to get a permit when it's not recommended I guess I'll just go up to sheriff office n see what happens !! Just thought someone may have been in same boat..n yes I passed the pics screening 2 months ago ...thnx for the help....

Sorry I'm going to get on my high horse here. Do you talk like that in real life?
Most of us don't talk this Texting gibberish. So sit down at a computer and make a complete coherent post of what exactly the card/LEO told you. Or I got to say I'm with them on the denial on that alone. OR there's more to your background that your admitting to.

I'm sorry many of us have run in to issues while carrying a gun that required us to either know when not to talk or how to explain things clearly.
If you can't do anything more to mutter broken up statements and gawd forbid you do get a LTCF and have some sort of run in-you'll just be more fodder for the anti's or do more then a weekend for a DUI.

I'm confused about this local check. Not that Monroe is great example on how it's done- but I dropped off the paper work and they did their thing. I don't get this pre-check.

[proformica]

The creator of this thread should be directed to the relevant sections of statute before applying, because he will have to certify at least part of his eligibility, relating to conviction (doesn't seem to be one has to certify one's one char/rep, for example).
Creator, you have time to read this, and you should. Being a good citizen is more than applying for a LTCF, it is being aware of the law. And so:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...hoice=suppress
which is sec. 6109, to make sure you are eligible for a license. More so:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...hoice=suppress
which is sec. 6105, to make sure that after the conviction you are still eligible to possess firearms under state law. Please read all the definitons under:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...hoice=suppress
which is sec. 6102, giving those definitions.

I ran out of time to post, so someone else come along and link the federal list of prohibitions and the definitions, 18 U.S.C. 922 and 921.

Also link him to the UJSportal docket search to check his docket if a PA conviction or direct him to the appropriate website of the state of conviction to research that, or to the relevant authority whom can provide the background check. Then the statute and sentencing params can be found. Thank you. Hopefully the guy shapes up and he takes his reading and typing responsibilities as seriously as those of carrying firearms. Let's just say, a failure to communicate can end one's life from the barrel of an officer's gun, so it's important.