HB 1845 Passed the House and Senate today.

[glockman22]

this is great news..i cant wait to carry in state parks, and also not have the state take away our firearms like they did when Katrina hit..to me that is the most important issue of all the issues that passed for us..

[cybrus]

Here's my message to the Governor:

Governor Rendell,

HB 1845 recently passed with unanimous vote in both the House and the Senate. This bill does many good things - increasing penalties for assaulting police officers, providing additional security for victims of domestic abuse, and making firearm laws and regulations more consistent across the Commonwealth. I urge you to sign this important legislation quickly so that it can begin benefiting our citizens as soon as possible.

Thank you,
Dave Wyman

[vetter3006]

Awsome news, thanks to all who helped get our politicains to move on this bill.
Now let's see fast Eddie move on it.

[LittleRedToyota]

IANAL (lawyer or legislator)...

i'm not either, but here is my take on it...

But I have a question about the first bolded part "ANY LICENSEE". Does that mean that they're saying that you have to have a "License" to carry in a state park? Does this rule out open carry(without a license)?

Is there more to this that I am missing?

my take is that only LTCF holders will be able to carry in state parks now. i can also see how this wording could be construed to mean you have to carry concealed.

the reason is that it specifically says: "firearm may be carried as provided in subsection (a)"

and subsection (a) says: "(a) Purpose of license.--A license to carry a firearm shall be for the purpose of carrying a firearm concealed on or about one's person or in a vehicle throughout this Commonwealth."

since subsection (a) specifically mentions concealed (or in a vehicle), i could see it being held that carrying "as provided in subsection (a)" means carrying concealed (or in a vehicle).

i hope i am wrong. but, even if i am not, this is, at least, better than what we had before. though we might want to keep working in the future to disallow the DCNR from regulating the carrying of guns at all.

And then the second bolded part. "SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED TO...AUTHORIZE ANY COMMONWEALTH AGENCY TO REGULATE THE POSSESSION..." Is that kind of like a 'mini' preemption clause just to remind all state agencies that they are bound by preemption as well?

that section was struck from the final wording of the bill, so it is irrelevant.

however, state agencies are not bound by the preemption clause. the preemption clause states clearly who is bound by it (which means everyone else is not). the only entities bound by the preemption clause are counties, municipalities and townships.

hate to be the bearer of bad news, but...

still, though, things are at least better than they were before this bill passed.

[Penguini66]

Thanks for the analysis LRT.

Still a step in the right direction but I can't help feeling like it is a hollow victory of sorts. But I guess if the anti's try to take rights away incrementally, we have to take them back incrementally.

Edit: Been thinking about this and a question came up. What if you are CC'n at a state park and your shirt rides up or your jacket comes open and somebody sees your firearm? What would/could they charge you with? I guess that's why I have a problem with the whole "LICENSEE" clause and what LRT pointed out.

Or say you're open carrying while hiking and unknowlingly stumble into state park territory? Maybe you have a LTCF, maybe you don't?

It just seems to me that the "LICENSEE" part of the law is fundamentally flawed. In order to have true consistency across the state it should simply state that anybody that is legally allowed to carry a firearm for any lawful purpose should be allowed to carry. Just like 99% of the rest of the state.

Oh, and does anybody have a link to the final copy of the bill that will hopefully be signed into law?

[ALS]

Did I read this right in the one section that states under an Emergency a person with a LTCF is allowed to armed. No Licence, no open carry hand gun or long gun. But with a CCW you are allowed to be armed on the street under a declared emergency.

Section 3. Section 6107 of Title 18 is amended to read:
15 § 6107. Prohibited conduct during emergency.
16 (a) General rule.--No person shall carry a firearm[, rifle
17 or shotgun] upon the public streets or upon any public property
18 during an emergency proclaimed by a State or municipal
19 governmental executive unless that person is:
20 (1) Actively engaged in a defense of that person's life
21 or property from peril or threat.
22 (2) Licensed to carry firearms under section 6109
23 (relating to licenses) or is exempt from licensing under
24 section 6106(b) (relating to firearms not to be carried
25 without a license).

[Zef_66]

Edit: Been thinking about this and a question came up. What if you are CC'n at a state park and your shirt rides up or your jacket comes open and somebody sees your firearm? What would/could they charge you with? I guess that's why I have a problem with the whole "LICENSEE" clause and what LRT pointed out.

Or say you're open carrying while hiking and unknowlingly stumble into state park territory? Maybe you have a LTCF, maybe you don't?

It just seems to me that the "LICENSEE" part of the law is fundamentally flawed. In order to have true consistency across the state it should simply state that anybody that is legally allowed to carry a firearm for any lawful purpose should be allowed to carry. Just like 99% of the rest of the state.

From how I read it, it seems that you just need a LTCF to carry a firearm in a state park. It doesn't mention anything about keeping it concealed.

I agree that it is not the best answer to the problem. But it is a step.

And this is the most up to date version AFAIK:

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/...r=1845&pn=4528

[knight0334]

Did I read this right in the one section that states under an Emergency a person with a LTCF is allowed to armed. No Licence, no open carry hand gun or long gun. But with a CCW you are allowed to be armed on the street under a declared emergency.

Section 3. Section 6107 of Title 18 is amended to read:
15 § 6107. Prohibited conduct during emergency.
16 (a) General rule.--No person shall carry a firearm[, rifle
17 or shotgun] upon the public streets or upon any public property
18 during an emergency proclaimed by a State or municipal
19 governmental executive unless that person is:
20 (1) Actively engaged in a defense of that person's life
21 or property from peril or threat.
22 (2) Licensed to carry firearms under section 6109
23 (relating to licenses) or is exempt from licensing under
24 section 6106(b) (relating to firearms not to be carried
25 without a license).

That is correct. Its been law for many years now.

[LittleRedToyota]

But I guess if the anti's try to take rights away incrementally, we have to take them back incrementally.

yes, we do. that is just the reality of our system.

Edit: Been thinking about this and a question came up. What if you are CC'n at a state park and your shirt rides up or your jacket comes open and somebody sees your firearm? What would/could they charge you with? I guess that's why I have a problem with the whole "LICENSEE" clause and what LRT pointed out.

Or say you're open carrying while hiking and unknowlingly stumble into state park territory? Maybe you have a LTCF, maybe you don't?

well, even today...if you blatantly open carry in a state park, you can only get charged with the summary offense of breaking a DCNR regulation. so, in the situations you outlined above, the worst that could happen is that you get charged with the summary offense of breaking a DCNR regulation.

Oh, and does anybody have a link to the final copy of the bill that will hopefully be signed into law?

here is a link to the final version that passed both the house and senate:

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/...r=1845&pn=4528

[LittleRedToyota]

From how I read it, it seems that you just need a LTCF to carry a firearm in a state park. It doesn't mention anything about keeping it concealed.

it kinda does though. it refers to subsection (a) and subsection (a), in turn, refers to concealed.

see my post above for a complete analysis.

but, IANAL....my analysis could be wrong.