Updated Directive 137 - one page, take this with you to Philly

[Philbert]

VUFA violation sounds like something the TSA would do.

[shooter357]

That whole "City of The First Class..." needs to be removed from the UFA....

I agree with this. The "protection" that this statute was suppose to offer has been abused more than a redheaded stepchild. I have yet to see any positive results from this obamanation() of law.

[FJRMarty]

As pointed out, I think every paragraph has something wrong, either in terminology or legalese or language. Wouldn't something like this be written by the legal department, at least reviewed by a 1st year intern, or a secretary, before being circulated, or am I being naive?

I am skeptical of its origin.

Scary to think the poor citizens in Phila rely on these types of authority to keep their streets safe.

[1iarrowking]

[QUOTEScary to think the poor citizens in Phila rely on these types of authority to keep their streets safe.[/QUOTE]

The poor citizens of Philadelphia keep electing the same dumb douche bags, who appoint more dumb douche bags to all the bureaucratic positions, year after year. The well oiled Democratic liberal machine is alive and well in Philadelphia.

[Falcon118]

I have an issue with section E of the doc.

E. HOWEVER, IF THE INDIVIDUAL CANNOT PRODUCE A VALID
CONCEALED CARRY LICENSE OR THE LICENSE IS NOT VALID
(I.E. EXPIRED OR REVOKED), PROBABLE CAUSE THEN EXISTS
TO ARREST THE INDIVIDUAL FOR THE VUFAVIOLATION

If an individual has an LTCF that has expired by not more than 6 months, that LTCF is still considered VALID. This could cause the PPD issues if they arrest someone for an expired LTCF, when it is still considered valid by statute.

Title 18 §6106. Firearms not to be carried without a license.

(a) Offense defined.--

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person who carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license under this chapter commits a felony of the third degree.

(2) A person who is otherwise eligible to possess a valid license under this chapter but carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license and has not committed any other criminal violation commits a misdemeanor of the first degree.

(b) Exceptions.--The provisions of subsection (a) shall not apply to:

<SNIP>

(12) A person who has a lawfully issued license to carry a firearm pursuant to section 6109 (relating to licenses) and that said license expired within six months prior to the date of arrest and that the individual is otherwise eligible for renewal of the license.

[gbrown221]

VUFA violation sounds like something the TSA would do.

VUFA is a term I hear a lot of cops using. Not just Philadelphia. I believe it is short for Violation of Uniform Firearms Act.

[mrjam2jab]

the directive calls License's a "Concealed Carry License" I think the intent of the directive wording is any recognized license/permit. eg. if you had a Utah CFP or Florida CWL you would be also govered.

just my OP

So it should say "carry license"....

VUFA is a term I hear a lot of cops using. Not just Philadelphia. I believe it is short for Violation of Uniform Firearms Act.

Thats what I heard it meant too. So then technically "VUFA violation" is kinda redundant.

[ThomasJ]

For me, the biggest issue with the appearance of the validity of this document is that it looks exactly like some kid banged it out on his mommy's home computer. It is even worded just as poorly.

There are no names, there are no signatures, there is no letterhead, there are no seals.

This is the lamest excuse for an official document I have ever seen, and I myself question it's authenticity. There is no way I would show this to an officer on the street.

A "Word" document? Seriously? Wow.

Exactly.

+10

[PA Traveler]

I believe the blatant Fourth Amendment violations are far more disconcerting than what they call a LTCF.

I agree with that as well. All I am saying is to even get them to read anything, much less understand it, it has to be kept simple and without anything they can jump on to reinforce their erroneous ideas. (or as little as possible, anyway.)

It just seems like it might help, and couldn't hurt.

Although, now that I think of it, this was written by PPD.

[JDMTAI]

sorry for being a noob. so in the City Of Philadelphia you can OC your firearm as stated in the directive? Case i always thought you couldn't OC in Philadelphia but once your outside Philadelphia you can OC? please inform me on this i did also print out the directive 17 so i can carry it on me