Is the Chesco Sheriff's deputy wrong, or am I? UPDATED: The Sheriff responds

[TheWolff]

I wasn't printed either when I got mine in January, nor my brother. Recieved them 2 weeks later without issue.

Good info, thanks.

As far as the rest of your post, it seems pretty doubtful that you must have it on your hip. At least he was polite, but let's be thankfull that this LEO is confined to the ChesCo. courthouse and not out menacing the public with his lack of legal knowledge.

Yeah, they're keeping him pretty busy. He said they've been receiving 30-35 applications a day for the last 2 years. His tact and politeness are what make me want to give a call back to educate him, if anyone can find a statute or caselaw to use. Here's what the UFA says:

§ 6109. Licenses.

Purpose of license. -- 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 throughout this Commonwealth.

Now to me, I can see how that could be read his way or otherwise, depending on interpretation. This was a good example for me to use when explaining to the wife why to not tell the officer there is a weapon in the vehicle. The premise of asking the question itself is stupid. A person that means to do the officer harm would not only not inform, but likely shoot the officer before he could ask the question. A law-abiding citizen will try to comply with the polite officer and get a fine for being honest about legally carrying a gun in the glovebox. No good can come of informing.

[TheWolff]

Are you going to post a copy of the letter you're writing to the sheriff informing him of the bad information his subordinates are giving out the public?

I got his name so I could do that and I will if someone can find me a statute or caselaw that shows his interpretation is incorrect. I don't believe it's correct, and I don't believe it's the spirit of the law, but reading the UFA, I can understand how he would interpret it that way. I wish he could have found the charge or offense I'd be fined for, so I could research it from that angle. Anyone have any ideas?

[HiredGoon]

under this guys rules when i go to the range with my gun in the trunk i am subject to a fine.

Stop posting and call a lawyer.

[mpan72]

I got his name so I could do that and I will if someone can find me a statute or caselaw that shows his interpretation is incorrect. I don't believe it's correct, and I don't believe it's the spirit of the law, but reading the UFA, I can understand how he would interpret it that way. I wish he could have found the charge or offense I'd be fined for, so I could research it from that angle. Anyone have any ideas?

You already posted it. There is a differance in the meaning of the words "or" and "and". If the law dosen't prohibit something it is legal. I can't see how someone can take the statute to mean you have to have it on your hip or you will get fined. I don't even know where he got the idea of a fine being involved at all. Sometimes when people don't understand something completly they just make stuff up to fill in the blanks.

[TheWolff]

You already posted it. There is a differance in the meaning of the words "or" and "and". If the law dosen't prohibit something it is legal. I can't see how someone can take the statute to mean you have to have it on your hip or you will get fined. I don't even know where he got the idea of a fine being involved at all. Sometimes when people don't understand something completly they just make stuff up to fill in the blanks.

It could be interpreted this way: A license to carry a firearm shall be for the purpose of carrying a firearm concealed or in a vehicle throughout this Commonwealth.

If that's how he's reading it, the question is how "carry" is defined. Is it in a holster, or pocket on my body, or is just having it with me somewhere in the car carrying it?

When there are multiple instances of the word "or", it's a matter of interpretation to define where the options are.

ETA: You bring up a good point about if the law doesn't prohibit something, it is legal. Maybe I'll write to the sheriff asking for an explanation and try to figure out what he was talking about regarding a fine. I'll post a draft of the letter here for tips before sending.

[Breadman03]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/about

Reasonably close to; in the vicinity, according to Merriam-Webster.

[Remington788]

Yeah, they're keeping him pretty busy. He said they've been receiving 30-35 applications a day for the last 2 years. His tact and politeness are what make me want to give a call back to educate him, if anyone can find a statute or caselaw to use.

Over-worked under-informed deputy.

He wrong, but he was nice about it and it sound like he is open to learning.
If you write him a letter, be as civil as he was. Be an ambassador for gun owners.

If you copy the letter here, please redact all names and email addresses. Otherwise he will start getting a ton of letters from the cop haters here. Then he might stop being nice to folks like you.


As far as fingerprints, I think Philadelphia is the only county that does that, but I could be mistaken.

[internet troll]

I was at the Chesco County Sheriff's office today with the wife, so she could apply for her LCTF. He told her that PA is an open carry state, but he doesn't recommend it. He told her the license allows her to conceal or to carry in a vehicle as long as it is "on your side", and that if she gets stopped, if the officer asks if she's carrying and she says "yes, it's in the glovebox or under the seat", she'll get a fine. He said even those purses designed for carry aren't legal with a LCTF in a vehicle.

I interrupted there and said, excuse me Sir, that's just not true. I told him there is no obligation to conceal with the LCTF, and when carrying in a vehicle, the weapon can certainly be elsewhere on or about her person. He reiterated that it's for "on your hip", and said you can OC in PA, but need a license to conceal or carry in a vehicle, then said "why else would you need a license"? I told him to carry concealed or otherwise in a vehicle, to carry during declared SOE, to accept a loaned firearm. He asked me if I was a cop. I said, "no, just an informed citizen".

He said "seriously, if you get pulled over and tell the officer that you have a gun in the glovebox, you'll get a fine". I said "first, I'm not telling you I have a gun in the vehicle, but if you don't mind, what's the charge or offense that I'd be getting the fine for?" He said he didn't know, but was sure that it was illegal. He said I could ask any cop.

Then during portion where he talked about castle doctrine, he said "pretty much any time you shoot someone, somebody is going to sue you", without explaining anything about the protection castle doctrine provides against such suits. I didn't say anything, figuring I'd teach her more about castle doctrine on the drive home.

So what's the verdict on carry in a vehicle? Is there any caselaw to show that "on or about my person" doesn't include the center console or glovebox? What about the exception for my spouse needing a LCTF if I own the car, gun, and have an LCTF? Doesn't that assume the gun is not on my person?

The Corporal was polite the whole time and encouraged me to educate myself by reading and asking other officers. He said if I find he's wrong, to give him a call back.

Oh, he also didn't take her fingerprints. Are they not doing that now, or did he forget and she'll get denied for it?

It seems to me that since one of the exceptions for the law is

(13) Any person who is otherwise eligible to possess a firearm under this chapter and who is operating a motor vehicle which is registered in the person's name or the name of a spouse or parent and which contains a firearm for which a valid license has been issued pursuant to section 6109 to the spouse or parent owning the firearm.

This suggests to me that it is ok to leave a gun in the car in various places since the gun is in the car and the person with the ltcf is not, yet a person without a ltcf can still use the vehicle.

edit; rereading your original post, I see you already took that into account.

[TheWolff]

Over-worked under-informed deputy.

He wrong, but he was nice about it and it sound like he is open to learning.
If you write him a letter, be as civil as he was. Be an ambassador for gun owners.

If you copy the letter here, please redact all names and email addresses. Otherwise he will start getting a ton of letters from the cop haters here. Then he might stop being nice to folks like you.

I will. I was thinking of addressing him directly, but at some point, when I said "so what you're saying is, if I get pulled over, and have a lctf, and the officer finds a gun in the glovebox, I'm getting a fine", he said "yeah, heck you can ask that guy over there, he knows more about it than anybody". At that point he pointed to another deputy who was on the phone, but nodded emphatically in approval. I think it's a training issue that should be addressed from the top-down.

I will be polite, and approach it looking for clarification.

[streaker69]

I've had low paying jobs in the past, and I don't recall being able to use that as an excuse to pass along incorrect information. If they don't know what they're talking about then they should STFU.

I worked closely with them as a probation officer for some time in Chester County. No disrespect to anyone, but you have to understand that the starting salary for a sheriff position in Chester County is 26,500 dollars a year. Their day mostly consists of standing around the courthouse as a slightly more able security guard. When I pushed my little red button under my desk for a defendant with a warrant, rest assured at least 10 sheriffs would arrive to cuff them. They are very bored, and idle all of the time waiting for action. They are very underpaid considering even the local campus police officers make more then them, and most if all receive terrible training and little knowledge of law through chester county. Think of it this way, the courthouse is their domain, and they can do what they see fit, and if someone stands up to them, you can take it up with the judge who is, infact, on the same team as the sheriffs no matter what the scales of justice say. One of the sheriffs was telling me a story about how a local who was stopped for open carrying by the lukeoil almost was shot by WCPD for carrying his gun exposed and that it was not illegal, but it will "sure get you killed"