PPD Strikes Again - Confiscates weapon because I "refused to conceal"

[ByblosHex]

Besides you guys and 2 other people, I've never met anyone who new OC was Legal in PA. True Story.

[ThomasJ]

I'm gonna agree with PhillyKev.
Assuming that you are correct about their old policy (can you produce a copy of it like you did the new fax?), just substituting a new illegal policy for an old one is no improvement. Actually, you would have been better off if you had been arrested since you then might have incurred enough damages to interest a lawyer into taking your case on contingency.
I know you said you have one that will file a petition for return of the gun* (I guess you will pay the court fees) and go to a hearing, but will he follow up on the years of appeals?
You have stars in your eyes, just like you did when you open carried in Phila.
Good luck, I hope you get your gun back.

ETA -- *But not for the civil rights violation.

Completely agree. What has changed? Where is this documentation? Taking the word of some government agent who is representing (supposedly) the corrupt government agency and believing they are on your side is foolish and naive.

[ehidle]

Im amazed they know how to tie their shoes.

[ViperGTS19801]

Completely agree. What has changed? Where is this documentation? Taking the word of some government agent who is representing (supposedly) the corrupt government agency and believing they are on your side is foolish and naive.

Why do you continue to ask questions that have already been answered? This is like the fifth time you've asked about "what has changed" or "where is the documentation," and we've shown you every single time what has changed and posted the documents. Are you intentionally ignoring it at this point? Are you turning your nose up at the admittedly slow progress that's being made because it's not good enough for you?

You, who's done absolutely no legwork on this issue and wants to sit there and bitch about it anyway?

[ThomasJ]

I haven't seen a single document despite your fallacious "every single time" claim. And this "we" business??? Really?

[ViperGTS19801]

Like fuck you haven't - you're heavily involved in the thread where it was posted!

Here it is again since you don't seem to recall.

http://forum.pafoa.org/attachment.ph...3&d=1286420441

Like I have said, it's rather far from perfect yet, but we're making progress. And by "we," I mean a group of people that you are conspicuously not a part of.

[ehidle]

Like fuck you haven't - you're heavily involved in the thread where it was posted!

Here it is again since you don't seem to recall.

http://forum.pafoa.org/attachment.ph...3&d=1286420441

Like I have said, it's rather far from perfect yet, but we're making progress. And by "we," I mean a group of people that you are conspicuously not a part of.

Thanks for posting that again. It's the first time I've seen it, but I am new to the thread.

Here are the problems I have with it:

1) The first paragraph makes reference to "Open Carry Laws" where none exist. There are no "Open Carry Laws" in the Commonwealth of PA. There are no laws prohibiting open carry, but there are also no laws expressly protecting the right to carry in one manner or another.

2) The second paragraphs says "Pennsylvania is considered an 'open carry state' with the exception of Philadelphia." This is blatantly false. Philadelphia is part of Pennsylvania, and as such as just as "open carry" as the rest of the Commonwealth. That a license is required to open carry there is immaterial.

3) The third paragraph states that a "concealed carry firearms license" is required to open carry in Philadelphia, "unlike any other part of the state." The laws of PA state that an LTCF is required in *ANY* city of the first class. The fact that there are not currently any other cities of the 1st class is immaterial. Police officers are being given blatantly false information contrary to state law. I won't even discuss the fact that there is no such thing as a "concealed carry firearms license" in the commonwealth of PA.

4) Paragraph 4A is specious reasoning to say the least. By the same logic that is used to justify detaining anyone openly carrying a firearm in Philadelphia, police would also be justified in stopping every car they see to verify the operator's drivers license. There is no immediate reason to believe someone carrying a firearm does not have an LTCF, just like there is no immediate reason to believe someone operating a motor vehicle does not have a license.

5) Paragraph 4B is an illegal seizure of property without due process. This is equivalent to what truecrimson went through at Home Depot. A firearm in a holster presents no threat of discharge. A firearm being handled by someone unfamiliar with it presents a grave danger of an AD/ND. There is no public safety interest in someone attempting to handle an unfamiliar firearm having had no training on its safe handling and use.

[ThomasJ]

I've never seen that document before, and I have no idea what thread you're talking about since you linked directly to a pdf. I assume there's something somewhere that actually has some type of official stamp or seal or name or whatever that would source the document.

And no, by "we" you meant that you and some others have posted documents "every single time" I've questioned it. That is what you wrote. Not once has this ever occurred, either by you or this fabricated "we". Probably because there has never been an instance in which I've asked where the documentation is other than a couple of posts ago.

Once again, though, what has changed?

That's cool that you got to say "fuck," though.

[ViperGTS19801]

ehidle,

I agree with you on all points. Since these documents come down from the Commissioner's office, I may draft a letter, after I find out whether or not the PPD are going to continue to violate my rights, and copy your eloquence from your post to it to try and explain what still needs to be changed.

Thomas,

http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-14...-a-page-7.html

You posted multiple times before and after the document was posted. You have no place complaining about not having seen it - pay more attention next time. Maybe I didn't copy the link every time you asked, but it's been explained to you multiple times and you either are unable or unwilling to get it through your brain.

[ehidle]

ehidle,

I agree with you on all points. Since these documents come down from the Commissioner's office, I may draft a letter, after I find out whether or not the PPD are going to continue to violate my rights, and copy your eloquence from your post to it to try and explain what still needs to be changed.

Feel free to use any of my words, arguments, or writings. I'd be happy to help draft such a letter as well. Just let me know.