Duty to Inform? FOAC Says YES!

[Walleye Hunter]

Does this mean a demand to see the license while open carrying in Philadelphia, or open carrying during a state of emergency, may be lawfully ignored/declined? Since the statute only mentions concealed and in a vehicle.

IANAL but...my logic tells me that if a LTCF is required to open carry and I am OC'ing and asked for my LTCF by LEO one should provide it, I would not resist.

[God's Country]

All the seminars that are hosted by local reps are a cluster fuck of bad information. It's been going on for years. By now there has been plenty of time to script these out correctly. The fact that they still can't get it right leads me believe the primary focus is political theater, CYA, and don't forget to support your rep and donate on your way out the door.

[bluetrane2028]

Don't forget, in advance of the Pittsburgh rally, FOAC officers were telling folks that it was illegal for them to carry long arms during the state of emergency, regardless of LTCF.

That's just because they don't like rifle OC under any circumstances... Claim it's illegal and some won't do it for fear of retribution of law.

[Mr_Gixxer]

Of course I'm sure Kim has seen this thread by now and still believes he is right. "You don't find good information online" after all, he says, specifically using this forum as a prime example of this in his lecture.

[The Unknown 1087]

First, it's probably safe to assume this is something that varies from one department to the next.

Second, the driver having a license to carry is not proof that a firearm is currently present in the vehicle.

Last, the discussion is about whether or not there is a LAW in PA which obligates the driver to inform the officer if he is carrying a firearm. There is not.

Correct there is no law. However the encounter starts off with the officer knowing there is a possibility that there is a gun in it. And it’s not department specific. I’ve done classes with four south east PA centers and they all do the same thing now for all of the stops.

[Gunsnwater]

Of course I'm sure Kim has seen this thread by now and still believes he is right. "You don't find good information online" after all, he says, specifically using this forum as a prime example of this in his lecture.

When is someone going to suggest we withdraw all support to foac? Bad information, promoting infringement, lies about pafoa, seems like it should be enough for someone if someone isn’t a hypocrite. /sarc

[Mr_Gixxer]

When is someone going to suggest we withdraw all support to foac? Bad information, promoting infringement, lies about pafoa, seems like it should be enough for someone if someone isn’t a hypocrite. /sarc

I kind of look at it this way. The NRA, Trump, FOAC, I love my kids too but sometimes they say and do dumb shit and it needs corrected. I don't love them any less for it but it has to be addressed.

[Gunsnwater]

I kind of look at it this way. The NRA, Trump, FOAC, I love my kids too but sometimes they say and do dumb shit and it needs corrected. I don't love them any less for it but it has to be addressed.

I hope Kim does address this here and he should explain his thoughts on this forum in particular. Sure I’ve read bad information posted here, but I have never seen where it isn’t corrected with citations normally. We discuss the nitty gritty details in minutia over and over again.

[Mr_Gixxer]

I hope Kim does address this here and he should explain his thoughts on this forum in particular. Sure I’ve read bad information posted here, but I have never seen where it isn’t corrected with citations normally. We discuss the nitty gritty details in minutia over and over again.

The whole duty to inform thing comes up over and over again. In one thread from 2017 Noah Zark (not to put you on the spot) mentioned thinking the same thing about announcing the presence of a firearm in a vehicle if asked and asked if that was the case and nobody actually answered his question. Heck, there is a recent thread about vehicle carry in the new posts as we speak. Some also think that announcing the presence of a firearm may put you at risk and that's understandable, but telling everyone that YOU MUST inform when asked followed by citing a section of title 18 that has nothing to do with the subject is wrong and could possibly harm someone.

[GunLawyer001]

All the seminars that are hosted by local reps are a cluster fuck of bad information. It's been going on for years. By now there has been plenty of time to script these out correctly. The fact that they still can't get it right leads me believe the primary focus is political theater, CYA, and don't forget to support your rep and donate on your way out the door.

Not all of them; I presented at a local seminar sponsored by Bob Mensch, and didn't catch myself in any errors...

BTW, he's running another one in this area in July, somewhere in upper Bucks, probably.

Of course I'm sure Kim has seen this thread by now and still believes he is right. "You don't find good information online" after all, he says, specifically using this forum as a prime example of this in his lecture.

Maybe FOAC needs better legal advice.

Some threads here on PAFOA start off with bad info, but it seldom remains uncorrected. I'd be interested in seeing a link to a PAFOA thread where bad info remains dominant.

For example, PAFOA never promoted the naive "trusts can make new machineguns" theory. But ARFcom did. Guess who was right.

PAFOA told you in 2006 that local municipalities probably couldn't make gun possession on their property a summary offense, but they probably could post signs as the property owner. Others didn't believe that, they were certain they were right, until the Erie case.

On balance, PAFOA is an outstanding source for accurate legal summaries and analysis of our state and federal gun laws. That's why the PSP refers people here to learn.