Firearms and motorcycles?

[Kerovick]

Went out for a ride on my bike today CC'ing and a question popped in my head.

Say I do not have my LTCF (which I do) and I am on my bike OC, is this legal cause I'm not IN the vehicle and the weapon is in plain veiw or Illegal cause a motorcycle is a vehicle?

:-)

[cigarmanpa]

it's a vehicle and you need your ltcf. do a search comes up quite a bit around here

[jcabin]

You need your LTCF, CC or OC, while operating or a passenger in ANY vehicle, including motorcycles.

[Kerovick]

it's a vehicle and you need your ltcf. do a search comes up quite a bit around here

My apologies and thanks for the answer, it seemed like a grey area in my grey matter

:-)

[cigarmanpa]

My apologies and thanks for the answer, it seemed like a grey area in my grey matter

:-)

no problem, we're here to help

[Dannytheman]

The search button is your friend!

Happy to meet another rider!!

[snakeman21]

You need your LTCF, CC or OC, while operating or a passenger in ANY vehicle, including motorcycles.

The UFA simply says "any vehicle", which could easily be interpreted as any device used to transport people/objects. This could include skateboard, bicycles, etc.

[knight0334]

The UFA simply says "any vehicle", which could easily be interpreted as any device used to transport people/objects. This could include skateboard, bicycles, etc.

Right. The UFA lacks a definition to the "in", "on", and "any vehicle" debate, but any judge and justice will go to another Title of law and borrow definition before making raw case law. And the next definition over in the PA Statutes is the following.

75 Pa.C.S.A. § 102

"Vehicle." Every device in, upon or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, except devices used exclusively upon rails or tracks. The term does not include a self-propelled wheel chair or an electrical mobility device operated by and designed for the exclusive use of a person with a mobility-related disability.

[MDJschool]

Where are they going to borrow the definition of 'in' from?

I'm going to assert the following affirmative offense, implicating the lot of you,

Lawyering (No warning, 5 points, Expires in 1 month)
Please do not offer advice that could land someone in jail. The last thing we need is people telling other members that's it's perfectly OK to carry a firearm in a car without a License To Carry Firearms, or that you can sell someone a handgun without going through an FFL. Like above, don't be afraid to post what you think is correct, just don't state things as fact when you aren't sure without a disclaimer.

, whose frequent suggestions that on a vehicle or 'in' the invisible planes that comprise some fantasy segment of time-space constitute a violation of 6106. If you keep repeating it, it will be used against you in a court of law; alternately, if you keep repeating it, defendants and lawyers will forget about the issue and fail to raise it in the course of criminal proceedings.

I believe that rules of statutory construction and case law do not support your presumption, and that my presumption can be proven through the consolidation of all previous threads on this very matter.

That a motorcycle may be a vehicle as to fall under the definition is not of particular consequence, insofar as it is the only word or phrase that must be construed.

Unfortunately, I have not yet researched the declaratory injunction or 1983 claims forwarding this type of preemptive complaint as to provide any sort of opinion as to how we can get his question answered at a limited cost and no jeopardy to any person. I can propose an alternative that puts someone else in jeopardy, that I am about to address in a post about research on criminal complaints and who must find probable cause to advance the process. Suffice to say, I think that a private complaint against police is not so untenable unless the DA is familiar and experienced with such attempts, or is otherwise simply ignorant and lucky in their response, in that: the courts have found that a DA must ascertain probable cause on the complaint, and denial on the sole reason of PC or lack of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is entitled to an appeal of de novo review at the CCP level, where the scope of review is simply a determination of probable cause. I hope to remember to post the link here as a finish that post.

[jcabin]

LOL MDJschool.