Carry pre-UFA

[Biggfoot44]

What was the situation for carry Permits before Uniform Firearms Act ? Any statistics on issuence , or Statute numbers ? Emphasis on 1972 to current era.

I am contemplating a pro 2A researh project to be put to positive use.

[MDJschool]

In the 1870s, there was a Pa. Constitutional Convention (Pa. Const. of 1874 resulted), and the usual whiners (Philadelphia, Dauphin/Harrisburg) were trying to impose slavery upon us all. It was noted that a judge in Philadelphia (OF ALL PLACES!) declared that it was the right of a citizen to carry a concealed pistol on the witness stand. If that's true, there goes 18 Pa.C.S. 913, 18 Pa.C.S. 6106... all the way back to the inception of the UFA in 1931 and past that all the way back to the 1850s when anti-gun statute (sans licensing) were being passed. We had constitutional carry prior to 1850, unless someone can find evidence of a rash of ordinances across the state.

The UFA and its attendant handgun licensing started in 1931. It is not an invention of 1972. It wasn't until 1988 and 1995 that the instrumental shall-issue changes occurred. Pennsylvania's history of tyranny seems to be 1850-current.

Hobson McKown wrote the following summary to his attorney to explain the history of the right to bear arms and what a 'crime' is in this state, and I am not aware of any such compilation available elsewhere on PAFOA. I cleaned up the document for presentation online as well. I will excerpt small bits here, after the link.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-_...kZ0WDVfVkhRajA
and please also see this thread:
http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-ope...stitution.html

MOTION FOR JUDGEMENT OF ACQUITTAL

I. HISTORY OF PENNSYLVANIA WEAPONS STATUTE

1. The Commonwealth's historical sections of statute regulating the concealed carry of firearms are primarily exposed by “Purdon's digests” (“A Digest of the Laws of Pennsylvania”) when compilations of session acts or the Pamplet Laws are not readily available.
2. This is exemplified by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court opinion on which all future right-to-bear-arms cases purport to rely: Wright v. Commonwealth, 77 Pa. 470 (1875). Instead of citing to the Pamphlet Laws, the Court cited Brightly's Purdon's Digest. A search of Pennsylvania cases in WestLaw for “Purdon's Digest” shows regular reference to varying editions of the text.
3. Occasionally, the court has declared the digests like Purdon's are not to be relied upon officially as to whether some Act or another is in effect or repealed. Here, citations to Purdon's Digests are only to establish that the sections of statute had ever existed.
4. Purdon's Digest, 6th Ed. (by George M. Stroud, 1841) appears to make no mention of any Act related to the criminalized carry of weapons or firearms resembling the current offense proscribed at 18 Pa.C.S. 6106(a)(1).
5. Purdon's Digest, 7th Ed. (by George M. Stroud/Frederick C. Brightly, 1852) is similarly devoid.
6. Purdon's Digest, 8th Ed. (by Frederick C. Brightly, 1857) shows the advent of local laws to regulate the carry of concealed deadly weapons in Philadelphia (Act of 13 May 1850, § 14) and York (Act of 8 April 1851, § 4. P. L. 382) counties, both which contained unlawful-intent provisions.
7. Purdon's Digest, 9th Ed. (by Frederick C. Brightly, 1862) notes only the two sections reported in the 8th Ed.
8. Purdon's Digest, 10th Ed. (by Frederick C. Brightly, 1873) includes those two sections reported in the 8th, and reports a new, similar section for Schuylkill (and later Luzerne) counties . This

* * *
[footnotes]
“This position is said to be supported, 1st, by the fact that the compilers of all the digests now in use omit the act of 1819, . . . As to the first of these objections, it is to be considered that the acts of Assembly in Pennsylvania are so numerous, and touch one another at so many points, that no compiler or commentator, however learned or diligent, can, in the absence of cases, undertake to declare with any confidence what sections or parts of sections of a particular law have been supplied by subsequent legislation. It is only when cases arise, and you come to apply the subsequent law, that it can be clearly seen whether the old law be superseded or not; and therefore it is no uncommon thing to find in our modern digests acts of Assembly and parts of acts, as still in force, which in reality have been supplied and repealed. And the compiler is quite as likely to omit a law as repealed which is really in force, as he is to insert a law as being in force which is really repealed. While the greatest deference is felt, therefore, for the learning and industry of the compilers of our digests and the commentators on our acts of Assembly, their opinions as to what laws are in force are far from being conclusive. It remains for the courts, after all, to determine this point, as cases occur from time to time for their consideration.” Lex v. Potter, 4 Harris 295, 296 (Pa. 1851).
<http://books.google.com/books?id=ZzpOAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA1>
<http://books.google.com/books?id=4jROAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA1>
<http://books.google.com/books?id=-jVOAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA150>
"Any person within the limits of the city and county of Philadelphia, who shall carry any fire-arms, slung-shot, or other deadly weapon concealed upon his person, with the intent therewith unlawfully and maliciously to do injury to any other person, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, . . . and the jury trying the case may infer such intent as aforesaid, from the fact of the said defendant carrying such weapons in the manner as aforesaid."
"Any person who shall wilfully and maliciously carry any pistol, gun, dirk-knife, slung-shot or deadly weapon in said borough of York, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, . . ."
<http://books.google.com/books?id=BzdOAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA181>
<http://books.google.com/books?id=EfZBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA323>
"Any person, within the limits of the county of Schuylkill,(Footnote b: Extended to Luzerne county, by act 16 March 1866, P. L. 229.) who shall carry any fire-arms, slung-shot, dirk-knife, or other deadly weapon, concealed upon his person, with the intent, therewith, unlawfully and maliciously, to do injury to any other person, shall be deemed guilty of

[knight0334]

I'm in concurrence with MDJschool above.

Pre-1850 or so PA was Constitutional Carry. After that there were laws either by the counties or other municipalities, or by the state, regulating carrying. For the most part those laws only affected "concealed" carrying, and left open carry unregulated.

PA's UFA really started in 1931 or so after a big national push for uniform and consolidated laws under the "Penal Code" example. The NRA was actually heavily responsible for the creation of the UFA, which restricted us more than the laws prior. This is one of the situations where the NRA actually fucked us. Prior to the UFA there was the general principle that a person must have intent to cause harm, but after the UFA that really didn't matter. ...all that mattered was the carrying/possession thereof.

[Biggfoot44]

Gentlemen , my apologies as to the 1972 refrence , that was driven by outside of Pa criteria , as an arbitrary baseline in a multi-state analysis.

Also my initial searches didn't show me much beyond the reforms of the mid '80s , and I hadn't made the connection of the UFA being directly linked to the "Model Pistol & Revolver Act" era , an interesting Chapter not much know today.

[Grey Bearded One]

Long time ago when the Earth was green
I got my carry permit quick as can be
I got me a letter from the local PD
And went down to see Sheriff Gene.

I went to the office there on Grant Street
And gave him my info on a little sheet
In few weeks the phone did ring
My mother said, "The sheriff wants something."

Downtown I went once again
And signed a little form with a ballpoint pen
I left with a piece of paper in my grasp
That said I could carry my Devel Asp.

That's the story of how I got my permit
You can see that it happened right quick.
I did it long before it became a trend
And now my story's come to an end.

[Biggfoot44]

I'm impressed. Was that Poetic License , or did you actually carry an ASP back in the day ?

[Grey Bearded One]

did you actually carry an ASP back in the day ?

Only in my dreams, only in my dreams.

[Pilot321]

This country ceased to be in 1861. It seems the era of the mid 19th century is when tyranny was reignited in this country, but it was of our own causation, not the British. Sad but true. We are seeing the culmination of all of it NOW.

[Jhaydeno]

6. Purdon's Digest, 8th Ed. (by Frederick C. Brightly, 1857) shows the advent of local laws to regulate the carry of concealed deadly weapons in Philadelphia (Act of 13 May 1850, § 14) and York (Act of 8 April 1851, § 4. P. L. 382) counties, both which contained unlawful-intent provisions.

"Any person who shall wilfully and maliciously carry any pistol, gun, dirk-knife, slung-shot or deadly weapon in said borough of York, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, . . ."

Thanks for the well written historical facts! Just a side note for accuracy, and I'm not trying to be picky, but be aware that there is a difference between York county and York City (previously a borough). I'm not sure which the law applied to, but I'm guessing the city. The city was, and still is to some extent, one of the mecca's for industry a 100 years ago (in fact we have a fantastic large museum dedicated to cool old industrial stuff here for those that are interested). The remainder of the county is dotted by smaller towns & bergs and is highly agricultural.

[Grey Bearded One]

This country ceased to be in 1861. It seems the era of the mid 19th century is when tyranny was reignited in this country, but it was of our own causation, not the British. Sad but true. We are seeing the culmination of all of it NOW.

Tyranny returned when that upstart Washington sent Federal troop to put down the Whiskey Rebellion.