Under 21 OC without permit

[tallbump]

Nope, her gun. Gave it to her on her 18th birthday.

My car, my License to carry, is there a law that stops me from driving with her gun in my car? I am not being smart, I am asking. That's why I started the thread, to learn.

If she's in the car, there's no transfer issue.

But I am the one transporting it.

[Walleye Hunter]

Nope, her gun. Gave it to her on her 18th birthday.

My car, my License to carry, is there a law that stops me from driving with her gun in my car? I am not being smart, I am asking. That's why I started the thread, to learn.

If she's in the car, there's no transfer issue.

But I am the one transporting it.

I find your question interesting but my gut is telling me it's not legal. IANAL but my thoughts are that you are not transporting it if it's not in your possession, she is. I'd like to ask another question...I'm guessing that you're not just posing a hypothetical scenario for learning purposes. Let's say that you are in the process of executing this mission and get stopped by a copper. Are you mentally and financially prepared for him/her to disagree with your assessment of the law and run you through due process?

[R L Suehr]

I find your question interesting but my gut is telling me it's not legal. IANAL but my thoughts are that you are not transporting it if it's not in your possession, she is. I'd like to ask another question...I'm guessing that you're not just posing a hypothetical scenario for learning purposes. Let's say that you are in the process of executing this mission and get stopped by a copper. Are you mentally and financially prepared for him/her to disagree with your assessment of the law and run you through due process?

This is what it comes down to whenever this is discussed. There could be loopholes around this stuff, but are you willing to fight it in court and more importantly is your daughter? It's her rights that are at stake.

[gnbrotz]

This is what it comes down to whenever this is discussed. There could be loopholes around this stuff, but are you willing to fight it in court and more importantly is your daughter? It's her rights that are at stake.

I agree, but I think it's much easier to "get away with this" (and I think the proposed actions are legal) if one remembers and asserts one's rights. Observing an OCer on foot is not RAS for a stop, and if one is initiated, it should be treated as a "mere encounter" and swiftly terminated by the non-LE party.

One would think this would be a little easier, and also not a foreign concept, when dad appears to be LE himself (based solely on his avatar choice).

[tallbump]

I agree, but I think it's much easier to "get away with this" (and I think the proposed actions are legal) if one remembers and asserts one's rights. Observing an OCer on foot is not RAS for a stop, and if one is initiated, it should be treated as a "mere encounter" and swiftly terminated by the non-LE party.

One would think this would be a little easier, and also not a foreign concept, when dad appears to be LE himself (based solely on his avatar choice).

Correct. I do work in LE. I also own a shepherd and at the time I joined the liberals were all against the Chase character as it was during the whole George Floyd thing. So it was a bit of a trifecta

I do understand that it's asserting rights, and possibly a loophole.

I used to work in law for about 10 years, so I am quite experienced in having to do this

But I really don't think it's even a loophole. I am the one transporting the firearm. I am also transporting her. It's my vehicle, in my name, and I am driving. She's not transporting anything, not even herself.
Now, if she were driving, maybe that would be different, but if I am operating my vehicle, I don't see how there's any law violation.

[Jhaydeno]

Correct. I do work in LE. I also own a shepherd and at the time I joined the liberals were all against the Chase character as it was during the whole George Floyd thing. So it was a bit of a trifecta

I do understand that it's asserting rights, and possibly a loophole.

I used to work in law for about 10 years, so I am quite experienced in having to do this

But I really don't think it's even a loophole. I am the one transporting the firearm. I am also transporting her. It's my vehicle, in my name, and I am driving. She's not transporting anything, not even herself.
Now, if she were driving, maybe that would be different, but if I am operating my vehicle, I don't see how there's any law violation.

Let’s spin that around and see what would happen: she is driving your car, with your gun in it, and gets pulled over. She has an affirmative defense in court according to PA statute, because you have an LTCF. I don’t see any reason you can’t transport her, a gun (her gun), and allow her to OC once she gets out of the vehicle. Maybe you need to *hand her back* her weapon when you disembark from the journey, so that you were in temporary possession of it?

I am sure there are plenty of LEOs who don’t know the intricacies of the situation and would let the courts sort it out, so as noted by GNBrotz, any encounter beyond that is consensual, best to walk away.

[free]

If you're having to contort to convince yourself you're in the clear - you probably are not in the clear.

IMHO, too much risk here with too little benefit. Recommending waiting until the girl is 21.

[Emptymag]

Correct. I do work in LE. I also own a shepherd and at the time I joined the liberals were all against the Chase character as it was during the whole George Floyd thing. So it was a bit of a trifecta

I do understand that it's asserting rights, and possibly a loophole.

I used to work in law for about 10 years, so I am quite experienced in having to do this

But I really don't think it's even a loophole. I am the one transporting the firearm. I am also transporting her. It's my vehicle, in my name, and I am driving. She's not transporting anything, not even herself.
Now, if she were driving, maybe that would be different, but if I am operating my vehicle, I don't see how there's any law violation.

If I were an unsympathetic judge, I would make your life difficult once I understood the game you were playing.

I don't think you're really worried about it though because of your LEO connections.
I figured that from the start of the thread, but didn't really want to mention it, but the thought just keeps popping up the more you try to rationalize this.

[gnbrotz]

If you're having to contort to convince yourself you're in the clear - you probably are not in the clear.

Given real court decisions, it's more a matter of trying to guess in what fashion a judge might decide to just ignore the actual words written in the statute. Like when a judge decided that PA residents do not meet the definition of "any person".

In a world where that can happen, whether you're following the letter *or* spirit of the law seems to be irrelevant.

I've decided to basically do what I want, just like everyone else, and then remain aware of potential penalties if caught, and act in a fashion that would minimize the risk of a LE encounter where some transgression might be discovered even if I fully assert my rights.

You can probably knowingly break the law and get away with it most of the time, and you can most certainly be revoked/arrested/charged even if you absolutely are not breaking any law.

[SevenMilePete]

Hmmm, it seems you had your mind made up in the first place. Why ask for any opinions? You seem to know more about the law and loopholes than anyone who replied. The moderator should just close this thread.