Rifle carry on motorcycle

[AxiTech]

I looked all over and read plenty of threads. I couldn't find an answer to this one: I need to transport my rifle, on a sling, on my motorcycle. Roads will be a mix of local and Pa Turnpike, all in Pa. Legal?

[zackattack784]

Depends where you're going. Correct me if I'm wrong but in the law's eye's, a motorcycle and a car are the same as far as firearm transportation goes. So if it would be legal to transport the rifle in a car where you're going, it should be legal to transport it on a motorcycle.
Correct?

[AxiTech]

Yes, same under the law, but possibly different in that it will be on my back, in full view of all the sheeples.

[zackattack784]

I would look here:
http://reference.pafoa.org/statutes/...out-a-license/

Particularly,

(8) Any person while carrying a firearm which is not loaded and is in a secure wrapper from the place of purchase to his home or place of business, or to a place of repair, sale or appraisal or back to his home or place of business, or in moving from one place of abode or business to another or from his home to a vacation or recreational home or dwelling or back, or to recover stolen property under section 6111.1(b)(4) (relating to Pennsylvania State Police), or to a place of instruction intended to teach the safe handling, use or maintenance of firearms or back or to a location to which the person has been directed to relinquish firearms under 23 Pa.C.S. § 6108 (relating to relief) or back upon return of the relinquished firearm or to a licensed dealer's place of business for relinquishment pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S § 6108.2 (relating to relinquishment for consignment sale, lawful transfer or safekeeping) or back upon return of the relinquished firearm or to a location for safekeeping pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 6108.3 (relating to relinquishment to third party for safekeeping) or back upon return of the relinquished firearm.

That would be the relevant part I believe. So what's your take? Obviously IANAL, but if I had to fancy a guess as long as you fall into one of those categories, such as "moving from one place of abode or business to another", I don't think it should matter if it's on your back. Obviously it must be unloaded though.

[smithwessn]

8) Any person while carrying a firearm which is not loaded and is in a secure wrapper from the place of purchase to his home or place of business, or to a place of repair, sale or appraisal or back to his home or place of business, or in moving from one place of abode or business to another or from his home to a vacation or recreational home or dwelling or back, or to recover stolen property under section 6111.1(b)(4) (relating to Pennsylvania State Police), or to a place of instruction intended to teach the safe handling, use or maintenance of firearms or back or to a location to which the person has been directed to relinquish firearms under 23 Pa.C.S. § 6108 (relating to relief) or back upon return of the relinquished firearm or to a licensed dealer's place of business for relinquishment pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S § 6108.2 (relating to relinquishment for consignment sale, lawful transfer or safekeeping) or back upon return of the relinquished firearm or to a location for safekeeping pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 6108.3 (relating to relinquishment to third party for safekeeping) or back upon return of the relinquished firearm.

First sentence. "not loaded and is in a secure wrapper" It's probably not a god idea to carry a rifle slung over your shoulder. I have a soft rifle case with a shoulder strap on it. You may want to look into something like that.

[AxiTech]

Yeah, that 'secure wrapper' bit kind of answers the whole thing. Thank you for the info. I didn't want to take the case with me as I am selling the rifle, and will need to backhaul the empty case. Oh well.

[knight0334]

That only pertains to "firearms" - as in pistols, revolvers, SBS's and SBR's.

You can lawfully sling an unloaded and uncased rifle across your back and ride to where-ever. No license is needed unless you are in a City of the First Class or during a declared state of emergency.

[smithwessn]

That only pertains to "firearms" - as in pistols, revolvers, SBS's and SBR's.

You can lawfully sling an unloaded and uncased rifle across your back and ride to where-ever. No license is needed unless you are in a City of the First Class or during a declared state of emergency.

I guess I missed that "firearms" part.

[Floyd26DSM]

Maybe take a look at some ATV suppliers. Most of them are fairly basic and you could easily strap one onto your bike with minimal modification.

http://www.motorcycle-superstore.com...Guard-Pro.aspx

Also, you could just go WWII style. I am sure this will get some looks driving down the road:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Xa-600.jpg

[headcase]

A friend read this thread and asked me to post this:


We really should be reaching an elementary level of understanding of the statutes by this time, guys. Baldface assertions that cannot be backed up by a simple review and cite of the UFA need to be withheld. It's not news that we have a special definition of 'firearm' in 6102 or that we have redefinitions in sections of the UFA. It can be excused if something in the Game Code somehow limits or effects some law in the UFA or has some effect on gunowners in things that don't seem relevant; that can be forgiven, fine. Failing to understand (on an elementary level) something like carrying a rife cannot be excused.

18 PA.C.S. 6106 does not define 'firearm'. 6106 therefore yields to the 6102 definition (a la handguns, SBR, SBS.) Carrying a rifle, where rifle is >16"-barrel/26"-OAL, is outside the purview of 6106.

Subject to additional definitions contained in subsequent provisions of this subchapter which are applicable to specific provisions of this subchapter, the following words and phrases, when used in this subchapter shall have, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the meanings given to them in this section:
[...]
“Firearm.” Any pistol or revolver with a barrel length less than 15 inches, any shotgun with a barrel length less than 18 inches or any rifle with a barrel length less than 16 inches, or any pistol, revolver, rifle or shotgun with an overall length of less than 26 inches. The barrel length of a firearm shall be determined by measuring from the muzzle of the barrel to the face of the closed action, bolt or cylinder, whichever is applicable.

18 PA.C.S. 6106.1 governs 'carrying of loaded weapons of other than firearms', specifying in pertinent part that 'no person shall carry a loaded [...] rifle[...] in any vehicle.' Refer to the 6102 definition of 'loaded' to advise how one should not carry 'a loaded rifle in any vehicle'.

(a) General rule.-- Except as provided in Title 34 (relating to game), no person shall carry a loaded pistol, revolver, shotgun or rifle, other than a firearm as defined in section 6102 (relating to definitions), in any vehicle. The provisions of this section shall not apply to persons excepted from the requirement of a license to carry firearms under section 6106(b)(1), (2), (5) or (6) (relating to firearms not to be carried without a license) nor shall the provisions of this section be construed to permit persons to carry firearms in a vehicle where such conduct is prohibited by section 6106.

(b) Penalty.--A person who violates the provisions of this section commits a summary offense.

“Loaded.” A firearm is loaded if the firing chamber, the nondetachable magazine or in the case of a revolver, any of the chambers of the cylinder contain ammunition capable of being fired. In the case of a firearm which utilizes a detachable magazine, the term shall mean a magazine suitable for use in said firearm which magazine contains such ammunition and has been inserted in the firearm or is in the same container or, where the container has multiple compartments, the same compartment thereof as the firearm.

I guess the 'compartment' that the OC'd rifle would be in must be "EARTH" so you just have to put a container around the magazine.

I don't see any annotations on 6106.1, meaning the issue apparently hasn't come up in the courts, reported by D&C or reaching appellate. 6106 hasn't provided anything useful either. Here ends our elementary understanding of the UFA that you guys SHOULD ALREADY HAVE A HANDLE ON AND BE ABLE TO CITE REGULARLY.

I personally dispute how we apparently understand 'in any vehicle' ('for our own safety') here and at 6106 and I have previously provided contending citation: <http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-open-carry-121/61550-carrying-bicycle-again-page-5.html#post769274>

In Com. v. Walker, 219 Pa.Super. 167, 280 A.2d 590., the court was asked whether two counts of 6106 violations, one for concealment on the person, and one for carrying in a vehicle, both arising from the same incident and course of conduct, was a double jeopardy violation. A man was seen having had taken a handgun from the trunk of his vehicle and had apparently concealed it on his person, shortly thereafter committing some crime. The court found that the commonwealth contention that two 6106 crimes existed from this situation would create an absurd result intended by the legislature, and apparently therefore used that issue to segway into legislative intent, discovering that when legislators got together to create Uniform Acts among the many states, it was intentioned that 'concealed on the person' or 'carried in a vehicle' simply described the /method of concealment/. There is apparently a handbook from 1930 somewhere we can actually read to find this intent.

Beside that, I argue that rule of lenity should protect anyone that reaches the courts. Com. v. McCoy 962 A.2d 1160, which is quite the case about the very kind of analysis we try to do here, determined what "into" and "from any place" meant for "discharging a firearm from any place into an occupied structure" (18 PA.C.S. 2707.1), and provides us with some citations on statutory construction. Here is what they mention on rule of lenity:

Importantly, our interpretation is further supported by the statutory mandate that penal statutes “shall be strictly construed.” 1 Pa.C.S. § 1928(b)(1); see also Commonwealth v. McClintic, 909 A.2d 1241, 1251 (Pa. 2005). Of course, the mandate to construe penal statutes narrowly does not override the “general principle that the words of a statute must be construed according to their common and approved usage,” and does not require this Court to give the words of a penal statute their “narrowest possible meaning.” Commonwealth v. Booth, 766 A.2d 843, 846 (Pa. 2001). The mandate “does mean, however, that where ambiguity exists in the language of a penal statute, such language should be interpreted in the light most favorable to the accused. More specifically, where doubt exists concerning the proper scope of a penal statute, it is the accused who should receive the benefit of such doubt.” Id. (internal citation omitted); [...]

The fact is that the Supreme Court didn't say it but the precedent of Walker is just as binding. The game is concealment, and a rifle slung over the back can't possibly qualify.

Anyway, there's a big epidemic not just on PAFOA but on the Internet of people saying things of 'fact' but without qualification, so that you might search for an answer to law on google and find all this banter about a legal subject but never any actual law (the most recent search in my memory was stuff about the Stinger Pen Gun, but I also recall seeing this in searching for dealers and selling AR-15 receivers.) We could all do ourselves a favor and get access to case law so that these things can be resolved more quickly than by the happenstance of some nameless person providing the product of his leisure time. If anything, we provide a more proper base for our personal discovers of law to branch from.

WestLaw access for PA cases is 117 a month and you have to promise to buy it for a year (although I have no comparison available, a quite useful feature is that the statutes are annotated.) LexusNexus is another provider of case law but I don't know what packages they offer that include PA case law. Fastcase provides all-states+federal case law for 95/month, and if they don't already, they're supposed to get annotated statutes for Pennsylvania, too. We could use a few more Law-service users on PAFOA (and of course a hell of a lot more users citing alongside their claims.)

The reality is that our government should be paying to give us access like this (one of the few legitimate reasons for use of taxes?) and it's possible that your courthouse library or some town hall setup or maybe just a public or school library has the kind of aforementioned access. Unfortunately you'd have to take a trip every time you wanted to know the law and always be writing down what you want to look up, and since you know it's your duty as a citizen to know the law, you should probably get access anywhere that has the internet, i.e. an account. Then you can surf the Law in the nude. That's how I like to do it.