fixed place of business case law??

[General Geoff]

I was reading through this, and found a reference to a "Commonwealth v. Carr" which seems to imply that the PA Supreme Court only recognizes the exception of "fixed place of business" in reference to carrying a concealed firearm without a LTCF, for the owner of said business.


From the paper:

There are several other jurisdictions with similar prohibitions
against unregulated handguns that limit the
‘‘place of business’’ exception to businesses in which
there is a possessory or proprietary interest. See, e.g.,
Scott v. United States, 392 A.2d 4, 6 (D.C. App. 1978)
(exception limited to those with ‘‘controlling . . .
interest in the business premises’’); Berkley v. United
States, 370 A.2d 1331, 1333 (D.C. App. 1977) (‘‘The common
understanding of ‘place of business’ read in context
with ‘dwelling house’ . . . is one of a protectible possessory
interest. . . . [T]he exception is applicable
only to those who have a controlling, proprietary or
possessory interest in the business premises in question.’’);
People v. Free, 112 Ill. App. 3d 449, 453, 445
N.E.2d 529 (1983) (exception extended to ‘‘proprietor’s
fixed place of business’’); People v. Clark, 21 Mich. App.
712, 716, 176 N.W.2d 427 (1970) (exception created to
allow people to defend place in which they have possessory
interest); State v. Valentine, 124 N.J. Super.
425, 427, 307 A.2d 617 (1973) (‘‘place of business’’ not
extended to cover manager of bar owned by another);
People v. Francis, 45 App. Div. 2d 431, 432, 358 N.Y.S.2d
148 (1974) (‘‘place of business’’ implies possession and
right to defend); Commonwealth v. Carr, 334 Pa. Super.
459, 462, 483 A.2d 542 (1984) (exception limited to ‘‘persons
who have a controlling, proprietary, or possessory
interest in their place of business’’). These cases illustrate
their respective jurisdiction’s statutory intent to
restrict the presence of unlicensed handguns in the
public sphere. Because we conclude that this is the
same purpose behind § 29-35 (a), we are persuaded
to follow the example of our sister states who have
interpreted the phrase ‘‘place of business’’ to mean that
in which one has a possessory or proprietary interest.8

Strong as my Google-fu is, I cannot find the Commonwealth v. Carr decision from 1984. Anyone else care to take a whack at it?

[MDJschool]

How you know your government hates you:
"The public interest would not be served by permitting millions of employed Pennsylvanians to carry a loaded pistol on the job." Com. v. Carr, 483 A.2d 542, 545 (Pa.Super. 1984).
The hidden punch line:
Millions of employed Pennsylvanians can openly carry a loaded pistol instead.

[MDJschool]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...t=800000000002

As for honing your google-fu, here's what I did:
googled "free pennsylvania case law search"
5th result is "AltLaw.org is Closed", whose page says "November 19, 2009 | Earlier this week, Google announced the addition of legal cases to Google Scholar. It's good, very good. But you don't have to take our word for it: try it out yourself."
Then I punched "483 A. 2d 542" into Google Scholar after selecting the "Legal opinions and journals" option, which wasn't selected by default.
Carr was the first result.

I hadn't heard of Google Scholar before but I am pleasantly surprised.

[VinF88]

After this case AFAIK one must prove a "controlling, proprietary, or possessory interest in their place of business."

Because he was "just an employee" is not enough reason to satisfy 6106(a).
(a) Offense defined. — No person shall carry a firearm in any vehicle or concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a license therefore as provided in this subchapter.

According to the Case:
The Statutory Construction Act at 1 Pa.C.S. § 1903(a) states in relevant part that "(w)ords and phrases shall be construed according to rules of grammar and according to their common and approved usage." "His" as used in 18 Pa.C.S. § 6106(a) is a possessive pronoun connotating ownership or control over the "fixed place of business." The gasoline service station clearly was the fixed place of business 462*462 of the proprietor, Mr. Cummings, and not the place of business of Appellant Carr because Carr had no controlling, proprietary, or possessory interest in the service station. Our legislature could not have intended to permit every employed individual in the Commonwealth to carry without a license a concealed, loaded firearm on the job site.

Personally i don't think this guy should have gotten hit like he did. This was a gray area and IMO should have been considered as such. I think they should have made it a point to make the statute to be less ambiguous because he had good intentions and was not IMO splitting hairs.

[MDJschool]

Personally i don't think this guy should have gotten hit like he did. This was a gray area and IMO should have been considered as such. I think they should have made it a point to make the statute to be less ambiguous because he had good intentions and was not IMO splitting hairs.

Check out the dissent, which readily points out that "permitting millions of employed Pennsylvanians to carry a loaded pistol on the job" is not really that absurd at all.

Myself, I can read fixed place of business as widely as an unchanging venue where affairs take place -- for example, if you've got a brick and mortar store, the business is the transactions of goods for money, and I think everyone who is carrying out their affairs at the fixed place is entitled. I can see place of abode read so expansively to include the immediate place of residence. I don't see how that isn't one way to read it, but I certainly can't see how the 'fixed place of business' element is so limited as to only provide for someone with a "controlling, proprietary, or possessory interest".

[VinF88]

Check out the dissent, which readily points out that "permitting millions of employed Pennsylvanians to carry a loaded pistol on the job" is not really that absurd at all.

Myself, I can read fixed place of business as widely as an unchanging venue where affairs take place -- for example, if you've got a brick and mortar store, the business is the transactions of goods for money, and I think everyone who is carrying out their affairs at the fixed place is entitled. I can see place of abode read so expansively to include the immediate place of residence. I don't see how that isn't one way to read it, but I certainly can't see how the 'fixed place of business' element is so limited as to only provide for someone with a "controlling, proprietary, or possessory interest".

Yeah I agree. This story hits home especially for me because my father and I own a gas service station just like the one in this case. I carry without a license right now when I'm there because I'm not yet 21. Personally I feel bad that this guy was made an example of because he was just following the statute as it seems written. He goes to work there every morning; seems fixed enough to me.

[headcase]

Words have meanings. While I don't believe the law should even be involved in who or where one, may carry a firearm, there is a difference between one's place of employment and one's place of business. One is where you work for someone, and one is where you run your business. To Vin, make sure you carry openly and transport it legally...

[VinF88]

To Vin, make sure you carry openly and transport it legally...

No transportation necessary however why would i have to have it open. Its our business.

[MDJschool]

No transportation necessary however why would i have to have it open. Its our business.

So do you have a "controlling, proprietary, or possessory interest" in the fixed place of business? That's what Carr requires. If not, you should start writing your motions and briefs now for a court case that could happen upon you. You might have the legally superior position, and I'm sure we'd applaud you for moving to overturn Carr, but Carr is just another piece of written down words that someone (police, prosecutor, judge) will try to use to back up their attack against your liberty.

[headcase]

No transportation necessary however why would i have to have it open. Its our business.

If you meet the definition of an owner of a fixed place of business, then you may conceal it there. Do you ever work outside the building? Not sure they would consider that being in your fixed place of business. Take the trash out? Run out to get lunch and forget it's on you? Million ways to fuck you without a LTCF, my friend. Would not want to see you have to defend your ability to get a LTCF in the future, much less even possess a firearm, because someone called the cops and the responding cops decided to let the courts sort it out....