HB 1066 - Rep. Cutler proposes changes to licensing

[Brick]

Here's the actual language from the bill instituting the change:

(2) If a revocation of a license to carry firearms is
12 based on subsection (e)(1)(i) or for good cause not otherwise
13 specifically enumerated under subsection (e)(1), the issuing
14 authority shall provide the licensee notice via certified
15 mail of intent to revoke the license. The licensee shall have
16 a right to an evidentiary hearing before the court of common
17 pleas for the judicial district in which the individual
18 resides prior to the revocation. If the licensee fails to
19 respond to a notice of intention to revoke within 30 days,
20 the issuing authority may revoke the license and the
21 individual shall be deemed to have waived the right to appeal
22 the revocation.

And here is 6109 e

(e) Issuance of license.--
(1) A license to carry a firearm shall be for the purpose of carrying a firearm concealed on or about one's person or in a vehicle and shall be issued if, after an investigation not to exceed 45 days, it appears that the applicant is an individual concerning whom no good cause exists to deny the license. A license shall not be issued to any of the following:
(i) An individual whose character and reputation is such that the individual would be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety.
(ii) An individual who has been convicted of an offense under the act of April 14, 1972 (P.L. 233, No. 64), known as The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act. [FN1]
(iii) An individual convicted of a crime enumerated in section 6105.
(iv) An individual who, within the past ten years, has been adjudicated delinquent for a crime enumerated in section 6105 or for an offense under The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act.
(v) An individual who is not of sound mind or who has ever been committed to a mental institution.
(vi) An individual who is addicted to or is an unlawful user of marijuana or a stimulant, depressant or narcotic drug.
(vii) An individual who is a habitual drunkard.
(viii) An individual who is charged with or has been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year except as provided for in section 6123 (relating to waiver of disability or pardons).
(ix) A resident of another state who does not possess a current license or permit or similar document to carry a firearm issued by that state if a license is provided for by the laws of that state, as published annually in the Federal Register by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms of the Department of the Treasury under 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(19) (relating to definitions).
(x) An alien who is illegally in the United States.
(xi) An individual who has been discharged from the armed forces of the United States under dishonorable conditions.
(xii) An individual who is a fugitive from justice. This subparagraph does not apply to an individual whose fugitive status is based upon nonmoving or moving summary offense under Title 75 (relating to vehicles).
(xiii) An individual who is otherwise prohibited from possessing, using, manufacturing, controlling, purchasing, selling or transferring a firearm as provided by section 6105.
(xiv) An individual who is prohibited from possessing or acquiring a firearm under the statutes of the United States.

I think I'm with Iron Sight here in that this bill legitimizes the Character and Reputation clause.

But, an additional caveat that I find against this bill is in the last two lines. "Shall be deemed to have waived the right to appeal the revocation" is pretty scary too me! Do you mean forever? How about if the person is unable to respond to the revocation action, through a dibilitating illness like a heart attack or maybe he's a drilling Reservist or National Guardsman and ordered to active duty and unable to respond or make the court appearances or just file the papers.

[gnbrotz]

But, an additional caveat that I find against this bill is in the last two lines. "Shall be deemed to have waived the right to appeal the revocation" is pretty scary too me! Do you mean forever? How about if the person is unable to respond to the revocation action, through a dibilitating illness like a heart attack or maybe he's a drilling Reservist or National Guardsman and ordered to active duty and unable to respond or make the court appearances or just file the papers.

Very legitimate concern, however, there is already a provision in the law that allows for reapplication after one year (for non-permanent disqualifiers). I agree that this language should go, but it doesn't necessarily indicate that someone will 'never again' be able to obtain a LTCF.

[IronSight]

I'll call Rep. Cutler's office tomorrow, since I'll be in Harrisburg soon I'm going to try and arrange a meeting to discuss this bill.

I'll call Kim Stolfer of FOAC first though and see what contact we've had, if any, with him about this proposal.