I finally had a bad OC experience.

[RockIsland]

I'm not the one talking about walking around like a fool with an AR around his neck trying to prove a point.

You are however, making a point of looking like a fool.

Just curious, did you move here from the DPRNJ or Noo Yawk?

[ROCK-IT3]

Well then good for you I'm proud of you stick to the high road and not being a dick.

Too late for this little change of heart. You already called him a fool and a dick, without knowing him. What kind of fool dick does that?

[streaker69]

I'm not the one talking about walking around like a fool with an AR around his neck trying to prove a point.

Nice deflection. Again, how many times have you roamed the capital building and sat down and talked to reps? Is it more than zero?

My reps know me by name as well. I was just talking to their office yesterday morning. My wife and I have been very active in local politics for several years, many of the local people know us by name as well.

It's quite obvious you have a problem with people OC'ing. It's also obvious you're a dick.

[DOC1500]

Too late for this little change of heart. You already called him a fool and a dick, without knowing him. What kind of fool dick does that?

Knows all the legislators, goes all the meetings, and then wants to act like a fool on the street yeah makes sense to me.

[GunLawyer001]

IMO, no. Mere encounters require no response (or even acknowledgement) from the non-LE party. Ridiculous court rulings aside, how can I be legally obligated to produce something as part of an exchange I'm not obligated to participate in at all?

. . .

Because there's a statute requiring you to produce it, under some vaguely-defined circumstances. And Hicks doesn't even mention that statute, so it would be an uphill battle to argue that Hicks nullifies section 6122. Not saying it couldn't work, just that you'd need a judge to find that the officer (who he sees in court a couple times every week) made an "unlawful demand" of you (who the judge never met before and likely won't see again) by asking to see the LTCF. (My argument in "weapons in schools" cases is "if he had a purpose, and it wasn't unlawful, then it was a lawful purpose"; that applies here, as well.)

We don't live in a world or a society where justice is the norm. You have to pick your battles, unless you make money fighting them, in which case I'd suggest that people who donate to such battles learn to pick them.

[DOC1500]

Nice deflection. Again, how many times have you roamed the capital building and sat down and talked to reps? Is it more than zero?

My reps know me by name as well. I was just talking to their office yesterday morning. My wife and I have been very active in local politics for several years, many of the local people know us by name as well.

It's quite obvious you have a problem with people OC'ing. It's also obvious you're a dick.

Living northeast Pennsylvania all my life yes I do open carry but also respect an officer if he asked me for my license ,not bitching whine about it.
Okay let's see officer I do have my license. May I see it sir. Yes sir you may. Okay thank you have a nice day.
He goes his way I go mine. Quit your whining.

[PGRNPA]

Because there's a statute requiring you to produce it, under some vaguely-defined circumstances. And Hicks doesn't even mention that statute, so it would be an uphill battle to argue that Hicks nullifies section 6122. Not saying it couldn't work, just that you'd need a judge to find that the officer (who he sees in court a couple times every week) made an "unlawful demand" of you (who the judge never met before and likely won't see again) by asking to see the LTCF. (My argument in "weapons in schools" cases is "if he had a purpose, and it wasn't unlawful, then it was a lawful purpose"; that applies here, as well.)

We don't live in a world or a society where justice is the norm. You have to pick your battles, unless you make money fighting them, in which case I'd suggest that people who donate to such battles learn to pick them.

Phil, I agree with you I don't believe for one second that Hicks nullifies section 6122. But am I correct in saying that it looks like we have now, via Hicks, defined an out of bounds request in that the mere presence of a firearm makes a request for ID/LTCF unreasonable unless there is another circumstance afoot? If so, what might constitute a reasonable request?

[fallenleader]

this thread.

[Sgt.K]

The court held that his possession of a concealed gun was not enough to slap cuffs on him and pull him from his car and search him.

However, nowhere in the opinion do they even mention this:

§ 6122. Proof of license and exception.

(a) General rule.--When carrying a firearm concealed on or about one's person or in a vehicle, an individual licensed to carry a firearm shall, upon lawful demand of a law enforcement officer, produce the license for inspection. Failure to produce such license either at the time of arrest or at the preliminary hearing shall create a rebuttable presumption of nonlicensure.

So, there's a gap. Cops can't cuff you and search you based only on you having a gun, but if a cop makes a "lawful demand" while you're carrying or transporting, then you have to show your LTCF. There's a question about the penalty for not showing the LTCF upon lawful demand, whether it's the default M1 for all ungraded violations of the UFA, or whether the "penalty" is that you have to produce it in court later to overcome the negative presumption (which I think is the better argument).

Read the whole decision; what counts as a "lawful demand" under § 6122? The court doesn't say.

It's true that any statute which violates the Constitution is void (see the Game Code's requirement to produce ID in 34 Pa.C.S. § 904, and COMMONWEALTH v. ICKES striking that down in 2005), but the court didn't say that was the case in Hicks. So it would be a stretch to say that we can ignore § 6122 now, based on Hicks. If a cop initiates a "mere encounter", does §6122 impose a duty on you to produce your LTCF, or is the officer's demand "unlawful"?

Serious question:

Say I'm OC in a situation that requires my LTCF (i.e. Philly, or SOE). Has there ever been an argument regarding OC relating to the bold part of 6122(a)? Is that another gap?

[icp4life162005]

I'm not the one talking about walking around like a fool with an AR around his neck trying to prove a point.

FUDD ALERT! WARNING WARNING FUDD ALERT!
PLEASE REPORT TO YOUR LOCAL GUN SHOPS CHAPTER OF FUDDS ANONYMOUS, AND THEIR EVENING CIRCLE JERK.

TONIGHTS TOPICS INCLUDE: FUDDING FOR FREEDOM, WEAPONS OF WAR AND WHY YOU DONT NEED THEM, 9MM MIGHT AS WELL BE 22LR, FOLLOWED BY WHY AMMO MAKERS SHOULD HAVE STOPPED AFTER .45.

TONIGHTS SPECIAL GUEST'S INCLUDES THE NRA PANHANDLING FOR A NEW SUIT FOR WAYNE.