Lanc. Co. LTCF renewal card public disclosure?

[KMAG]

The renewal postcard has my name and address on the front and begins with "NOTICE OF RENEWAL FOR LICENSE TO CARRY A FIREARM" on the rear. (Emphasis in original).

Likely, my letter carrier now knows I carry plus anyone she tells. I am not happy.

The sheriff's postcard seems to be in conflict with Section 6109 (i), prohibiting public disclosure.

I will discuss why a postcard is used when the LTCF incl $1.50 for the renewal notice and will ask if the office will inform my references that the contact involves a LTCF. (They did not contact my references previously.)

Has anyone raised these issues with Sheriff Reese? If so, please provide details (privately if you wish). Thank you in advance.

IAAL.

[streaker69]

Of the three times I've applied/renewed through their office, they've only contacted my references once. That was the first time I applied and that was probably because I used two chiefs of police. The other two times they've never contacted them. I don't think I've ever gotten a renewal notice, but I am up for a renewal around august this year.

[Steve in PA]

Where does 6109(i) say anything about public disclosure? That section deals with revocation and notice of revocation.

(i) Revocation.--A license to carry firearms may be revoked by the issuing authority for good cause. A license to carry firearms shall be revoked by the issuing authority for any reason stated in subsection (e)(1) which occurs during the term of the permit. Notice of revocation shall be in writing and shall state the specific reason for revocation. Notice shall be sent by certified mail to the individual whose license is revoked, and, at that time, notice shall also be provided to the Pennsylvania State Police by electronic means, including e-mail or facsimile transmission, that the license is no longer valid. An individual whose license is revoked shall surrender the license to the issuing authority within five days of receipt of the notice. An individual whose license is revoked may appeal to the court of common pleas for the judicial district in which the individual resides. An individual who violates this section commits a summary offense.

[twency]

Where does 6109(i) say anything about public disclosure? That section deals with revocation and notice of revocation.

(i) Revocation.--A license to carry firearms may be revoked by the issuing authority for good cause. A license to carry firearms shall be revoked by the issuing authority for any reason stated in subsection (e)(1) which occurs during the term of the permit. Notice of revocation shall be in writing and shall state the specific reason for revocation. Notice shall be sent by certified mail to the individual whose license is revoked, and, at that time, notice shall also be provided to the Pennsylvania State Police by electronic means, including e-mail or facsimile transmission, that the license is no longer valid. An individual whose license is revoked shall surrender the license to the issuing authority within five days of receipt of the notice. An individual whose license is revoked may appeal to the court of common pleas for the judicial district in which the individual resides. An individual who violates this section commits a summary offense.

I believe KMAG meant 6111 (i).

(i) Confidentiality.-- All information provided by the potential purchaser, transferee or applicant, including, but not limited to, the potential purchaser, transferee or applicant's name or identity, furnished by a potential purchaser or transferee under this section or any applicant for a license to carry a firearm as provided by section 6109 shall be confidential and not subject to public disclosure. In addition to any other sanction or penalty imposed by this chapter, any person, licensed dealer, State or local governmental agency or department that violates this subsection shall be liable in civil damages in the amount of $1,000 per occurrence or three times the actual damages incurred as a result of the violation, whichever is greater, as well as reasonable attorney fees.

[jack76590]

First, I suspect the intent of the legislation about non disclosure was so a person, newspaper, etc could not call up and ask if Joe Smith has a permit and/or demand a list of all permit holders.

Second, I suspect that the notice is on the card so you don't throw it out with the junk mail we all receive.

Third, there has to be a court order for the government to maintain a record of the mail you receive.

Fourth, I doubt if the mail carrier has the time or the interest to notice who is sending you mail.

Fifth, do you receive any catalogs or orders from midway or other vendor? Do you get any gun magazines? Do you get newsletters from any gun clubs? If so are you as concerned about them being connected with you as you are about the sheriff's notice of permit renewal?

Lastly, you may have a point, but I think you are reaching, if you content the Sheriff is in violation of the statute. Now as a matter of policy, you might want to suggest the Sheriff discontinue the practice of stating the purpose on the outside of the correspondence. If his purpose is, as I suspect, to assure you don't throw out with your junk mail, I think it is safe to assume people are likely to open ANY correspondence with the return address of a law enforcement organization.

[twency]

First, I suspect the intent of the legislation about non disclosure was so a person, newspaper, etc could not call up and ask if Joe Smith has a permit and/or demand a list of all permit holders.

That may be but what's most important is the text of the statute, and the sheriff's actions seem to be in conflict with that text.

Second, I suspect that the notice is on the card so you don't throw it out with the junk mail we all receive.

As you noted farther down in your reply, a return address saying it's from the sheriff should be able to accomplish that.

Third, there has to be a court order for the government to maintain a record of the mail you receive.

Not exactly. The US Postal Service maintains an image of every piece of mail it processes and the use of the information is not subject to judicial oversight.

Fourth, I doubt if the mail carrier has the time or the interest to notice who is sending you mail.

I'm sure this varies by the carrier. Some won't care a bit, others might happen to notice in passing, a few might be very interested (benignly or otherwise).

Fifth, do you receive any catalogs or orders from midway or other vendor? Do you get any gun magazines? Do you get newsletters from any gun clubs? If so are you as concerned about them being connected with you as you are about the sheriff's notice of permit renewal?

None of those are information which is prohibited by law from public disclosure. The identity of a LTCF applicant is.

Lastly, you may have a point, but I think you are reaching, if you content the Sheriff is in violation of the statute. Now as a matter of policy, you might want to suggest the Sheriff discontinue the practice of stating the purpose on the outside of the correspondence. If his purpose is, as I suspect, to assure you don't throw out with your junk mail, I think it is safe to assume people are likely to open ANY correspondence with the return address of a law enforcement organization.

Well it's a clear violation of another statute, since § 6109 requires the sheriff to send the licensee "an application for renewal of license". The postcard doesn't meet that requirement.

And in my (worth what you paid for it) opinion it's also a violation of the confidentiality provision of § 6111.

[KMAG]

"Fourth, I doubt if the mail carrier has the time or the interest to notice who is sending you mail."


My street has a common name. How common? They have it as a drive, road, and street in this town. Furthermore, someone must be dyslexic at my P.O. as 3x since January this year I got my neighbor's mail when the house numbers were transposed. For me, the likelihood that someone else gets my mail is heightened. Being inside an envelope would allow the mail to be forwarded to me without the contents being observed, I do not like the postcard revealing I have/applied for a LTCF.

[ray h]

"Fourth, I doubt if the mail carrier has the time or the interest to notice who is sending you mail."


My street has a common name. How common? They have it as a drive, road, and street in this town. Furthermore, someone must be dyslexic at my P.O. as 3x since January this year I got my neighbor's mail when the house numbers were transposed. For me, the likelihood that someone else gets my mail is heightened. Being inside an envelope would allow the mail to be forwarded to me without the contents being observed, I do not like the postcard revealing I have/applied for a LTCF.

I don't think the sheriff can (or should be) responsible for USPS mistakes.
I don't think the USPS is considered "the public" so would not fall under "public disclosure". The mail is not subject to the public the whole time the postal service has it in their possession. Someone would have to commit a federal crime for the "public" to have access to your information,

[Statkowski]

Indiana County also sends out a postcard, not an application.

That being said, however, the postcard (if I remember correctly) points you to the Sheriff's Office website, where you can fill out and print out your renewal application at home (has to be signed on site). References, however, are not needed for renewals.

Technical violations, maybe, but I was in and out of their office in under ten minutes with my new license in hand (or wallet, or pocket, whatever). And i never got hassled at the court house entrance when I handed over my handgun for storage.

[knight0334]

Yeah, there is some issued with an open postcard type notification. But me personally, I wouldn't be concerned. I'm sure they would know even if it was in a sealed envelope with as many as they would have to deliver. And I believe most postal workers couldn't give a rats ass as to whether you are licensed or not, and if I remember correctly they all have to sign a confidentiality form(my aunt did, contract rural delivery).