Can PA Residents Carry in PA on FL Permit?

[rambling_one]

I'm new to the forum and am in the middle of a debate here in Maryland over the question: Can PA Residents Carry in PA on an out-of-state permit; i.e., sans a PA LTCF?

[tl_3237]

Absolutely. There was an attempt to disallow non-LTCF PA residents from carrying on out-of-state reciprocated licenses but that attempt was not successful during the last legislative session.

[rambling_one]

Thanks for the prompt response.

[uniballin]

+1 to tl_3237's response.

[soberbyker]

From the Pennsylvania Attorney General's (newly designed) Web Site:

Note: It has come to the attention of the Office of Attorney General that there has been confusion over the applicability of Pennsylvania's reciprocal privileges with regard to the residency status of an individual who has been issued a valid license/permit. It is the position of the Office of Attorney General that recognition within Pennsylvania is based on the issuance to an individual of a valid license/permit by the reciprocal contracting state, and not on the license/permit holder's place of residence.

http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/crime.aspx?id=184

.

[Curmudgeon]

Carrying in PA with nothing more than a permit/license from another state offers no protection from the 1000-foot Gun Free School Zone. This is the only issue I can see.

[uniballin]

Carrying in PA with nothing more than a permit/license from another state offers no protection from the 1000-foot Gun Free School Zone. This is the only issue I can see.

Maybe I'm confusing this with one of the many other strange wording issues in the UFA, but isn't this actually up for debate?

[mrjam2jab]

Maybe I'm confusing this with one of the many other strange wording issues in the UFA, but isn't this actually up for debate?

Not the PA UFA...but the federal 18 USC ss922

(2)(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to
possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects
interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual
knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a
firearm -
(i) on private property not part of school grounds;
(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do
so by the State in which the school zone is located or a
political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or
political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains
such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or
political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified
under law to receive the license;

[tl_3237]

Maybe I'm confusing this with one of the many other strange wording issues in the UFA, but isn't this actually up for debate?

Its never been tested in court AFAIK but there is the 2002 letter from BATFE espousing that restriction as well as the strict interpration of the law itself.

On the other hand there is a cogent argument that when a state's chief LEO (AG) assigns reciprocity he is validating indirectly a persons qualification as required in the law's phrase "the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license" (18 USC 922(q)(2)(b)(ii)). The counter to that is that the law seems to require 'individual' certification as oppossed to a class action type certification (which resciprocity is).

[mrjam2jab]

Its never been tested in court AFAIK but there is the 2002 letter from BATFE espousing that restriction as well as the strict interpration of the law itself.

On the other hand there is a cogent argument that when a state's chief LEO (AG) assigns reciprocity he is validating indirectly a persons qualification as required in the law's phrase "the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license" (18 USC 922(q)(2)(b)(ii)). The counter to that is that the law seems to require 'individual' certification as oppossed to a class action type certification (which resciprocity is).

I've seen the "argument" made that

the law enforcement authorities of the State or
political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified
under law to receive the license

says the reciprocal State has to run a background check on the individual...which is your counter.