Why your license was never actually revoked - juries, process, and law of the land

[Walleye Hunter]

This is funny. Is this someone who's been previously banned back for a repeat and see how long it takes? I don't recognize the guy as I'm fairly new around here but anyone else?

[Effecarry]

oooh 3 post wonder is calling me a troll

When they say it, they say it with sources cited and clarity and don't "suppose".

They ( the Sheriff's) are not claiming- they are doing it and where is this claim you claim?
So again what's your point? Are you here to lawyer? Did this happen to you?

As for the " this hearing IAW state law" What one?

No, they often do not cite things. We often take them at their reputations.

In your time of 3000 posts, have you ever seen a single poster or a single court case which is mentioned that a sheriff in Pennsylvania has held an administrative hearing, and has issued a finding of fact and law? But we've read about revocations purportedly having occurred, haven't we?

Pa.C.S., Title 2 is not that long of a read and is found on the website of the General Assembly. The bar on false adjudication is at 2 Pa.C.S. ss 553.

[internet troll]

Hobson aka mdjschool? Is this you?

[Effecarry]

This is funny. Is this someone who's been previously banned back for a repeat and see how long it takes? I don't recognize the guy as I'm fairly new around here but anyone else?

Is there any reason that you care more about trolling This Thread, then you do about contributing to ways that we might help secure gun rights? What part of educating Sheriff's and a solicitor is offensive to you? Contribute or leave the thread.

[Effecarry]

Hobson aka mdjschool? Is this you?

Contribute, or leave the thread. If every post is a troll, what does that do to help gun owners secure their rights? Can you ask that to yourself before you post, please? Please?

[internet troll]

Based on the predictable answer which I expected, my money is on yes, this is Hobson.

[Effecarry]

This thread should get very interesting on a number of fronts.

It might get interesting if anyone else bothers to say anything meaningful, toward the ends of securing rights for gun owners. Every poster has shitposted something, or posted simply to subscribe to the thread, which is not necessary to do.

Either add to my content, correct me preferably with citation or at least saying such a citation might exist, provide an alternative way to get this done, or get off this thread.

[Effecarry]

Based on the predictable answer which I expected, my money is on yes, this is Hobson.

If you were that concerned with rooting out rights, as you are for playing a game of "who is a poster", we might have secured those rights, already.

My message is simple. We have to tell our sheriffs about the law of the land, as formed under Local agency law in Pa.C.S., Title 2. There is our process. No one is permitted to ignore or dismiss it.

[Effecarry]

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...2&div=0&chpt=5

There is Ch. 5 of Pa.C.S., Title 2. Read sections 551-555 in particular.

"No adjudication of a local agency shall be valid unless . . ." Ss 553.
"This subchapter shall apply to all local agencies." Ss 551.
"All adjudications . . . Shall be in writing, shall contain findings and the reasons for the adjudication . . ." Ss 554.
The sheriff is subject to local agency law. Gardner v. Jenkins, 116 pa. Cmwlth. Ct. 107, 110-111 (1988).

[markshere2]

Well, you let us know when we are allowed to achieve the mystical knowledge that will get our public officials to follow the law, O gracious gun forum moderator.

Until then, I suspect that sending a letter or speaking with one's issuing authority and perhaps their solicitor, is probably the safest front line for lobbying the executive.

I somehow doubt that you believe that both due process and local agency law is not applicable. I would certainly like to know what you would suggest that we do, that is more safe and sensible, then getting our officials in line with the clear wording and intent of our legislature.

I have yet to see a case where a Court denies, with words, the local agency law exist and is required to revoke the license. What I do see is the courts ignoring it. Yet, before the courts, is the issuing authority, the first, best Target.

Perhaps, GunLawyer001, you might try less trolling, and instead provide comments and how we might better go about these activities. Otherwise, you can leave this thread. Try being an example for these gun owners.

Say, you sure can generate a snotty fucking attitude real quick, can't you?

I predict a short tenure here.