Wife got pulled over today...

**jthrelf** · March 11th, 2017, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by Gun

Asking a person if they are carrying, upon knowledge of their possession of an LTCF, is more a rhetorical question, unless the LEO needs to arrest this person.

LEOs should assume the holder of an LTCF is carrying a firearm, period.

This is not rocket science.

Should probably assume non LTCF holders are carrying too.

**Royinmontco** · March 11th, 2017, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by jthrelf

Should probably assume non LTCF holders are carrying too.

That's why I don't understand any of this. I keep hearing that cops assume everybody is carrying.... so why bother asking?

**bogey1** · March 11th, 2017, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by pennsylvaniaboy

While I fully support and respect police, you guys act like they follow the rules. I have come to realize that the rules do not apply to government.....at any level.

There are no rules when it comes to government. Sometimes its a good thing like in my case.
Building permits, depends what township I'm in, "just get it done they say"

My clients money stays in their pockets, not the townships.

**djeuch** · March 11th, 2017, 01:53 PM

I'm of two minds here. On one hand, I don't really care if the police do or do not know if I have a LTCF... as long as they don't treat me any differently. On the other hand, does it really matter?

To both points above though, I would venture a guess that a cop is more likely to be shot by someone who does NOT have a LTCF than the opposite... so shouldn't they just assume everyone is armed (and treated with equal respect?)

**MedicCop** · March 11th, 2017, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by PAMedic=F|A=

The inability for police departments to properly staff their own PSAP or keep an officer in the office to contact PSP does not change the fact that disclosure to a PSAP is a violation of the law. I can't violate protocol just because I can't contact the hospital to get authorization from a doc to deviate.It's pretty simple. If a person says they have a LTCF, the cop can believe them, he can arrest them if he doesn't believe them (and face civil rights charges if he is wrong), or he can take their info and check later, and if he finds out they are breaking the law & lied, have a warrant issued and arrest them later.

The law says 'law enforcement personnel', not 'police officers'. Like it or not, police dispatchers ARE law enforcement personnel in this situation. They are certified to access criminal history information and other databases, and sign NDA's pertaining to this.

Do you really expect every local police department in the commonwealth to not only have its own dispatch center, but to also staff it's own dispatch center with police officers?

**MedicCop** · March 11th, 2017, 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by djeuch

I'm of two minds here. On one hand, I don't really care if the police do or do not know if I have a LTCF... as long as they don't treat me any differently. On the other hand, does it really matter?

To both points above though, I would venture a guess that a cop is more likely to be shot by someone who does NOT have a LTCF than the opposite... so shouldn't they just assume everyone is armed (and treated with equal respect?)

While I agree, there is also a higher probability that a citizen who posesses a LTCF will be armed as compared to society as a whole.

**PAMedic=F|A=** · March 11th, 2017, 05:26 PM

Originally Posted by MedicCop

The law says 'law enforcement personnel', not 'police officers'. Like it or not, police dispatchers ARE law enforcement personnel in this situation. They are certified to access criminal history information and other databases, and sign NDA's pertaining to this.

Do you really expect every local police department in the commonwealth to not only have its own dispatch center, but to also staff it's own dispatch center with police officers?

If they are actually need a police force this would be a minor consideration. Most (half? at a guess?) don't actually need a police force. If you've got 5 or 6 officers, or less, you don't actually need cops. You might be able to argue they are "law enforcement personal" if they were non-sworn civilians, like the people behind the desk at PSP Barracks. Arguing that a 911 telecommunicator that works for a county is a law enforcement personal is a bit of a stretch. Especially when a majority of police departments are city, borough or township, when the last I saw hard statics 83% of the Commonwealth was covered by PSP full time, another 3% part time. Obviously, looking by both call statics, their primary job is EMS, their secondary job is fire. by geography is it absolutely not policing.

**MedicCop** · March 11th, 2017, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by PAMedic=F|A=

If they are actually need a police force this would be a minor consideration. Most (half? at a guess?) don't actually need a police force. If you've got 5 or 6 officers, or less, you don't actually need cops. You might be able to argue they are "law enforcement personal" if they were non-sworn civilians, like the people behind the desk at PSP Barracks. Arguing that a 911 telecommunicator that works for a county is a law enforcement personal is a bit of a stretch. Especially when a majority of police departments are city, borough or township, when the last I saw hard statics 83% of the Commonwealth was covered by PSP full time, another 3% part time. Obviously, looking by both call statics, their primary job is EMS, their secondary job is fire. by geography is it absolutely not policing.

I absolutely agree about the small police departments, but small boroughs and townships refuse to regionalize.

While 83% of the geography of the commonwealth is covered by PSP fulltime, that region only encompasses approximately 20% of the population of the commonwealth. The call volume will obviously be much higher where populations are more dense. Anecdotally, in areas of the commonwealth where I've worked, police calls always outnumbered EMS calls by a ratio of maybe 5:1 and fire calls by at least 10:1. So, by population, their job definitely IS policing.

**soberbyker** · March 11th, 2017, 06:20 PM

Originally Posted by MedicCop

I absolutely agree about the small police departments, but small boroughs and townships refuse to regionalize.

While 83% of the geography of the commonwealth is covered by PSP fulltime, that region only encompasses approximately 20% of the population of the commonwealth. The call volume will obviously be much higher where populations are more dense. Anecdotally, in areas of the commonwealth where I've worked, police calls always outnumbered EMS calls by a ratio of maybe 5:1 and fire calls by at least 10:1. So, by population, their job definitely IS policing.

Delaware County is a prime example of that, third smallest area wise but 5th in population with 49 municipalities. Of those 49 only 6 use the PSP for police services.

.

**Bang** · March 11th, 2017, 06:32 PM

Townships in Bucks County are regionalized to an extent. Our township and neighboring townships and boroughs had their in-house radio dispatchers and received/answered phone calls until the county forced all to let county do it. That increased radio traffic and officer responses, too. Because in house dispatcher knew the crazy lady on Wickets Drive with the attack rabbit didn't really have her car stolen because the dispatcher knew crazy lady didn't have a car, but county dispatch didn't know that and had to send even if they did.