imported post
Mike wrote:
lprgcFrank wrote:
georgedonnelly wrote:
"Specifically, they seem to not understand that a license to carry firearms is not a concealed carry permit, but rather it is a license to carry firearms statewide"
Huh? I thought the following were true:
- There is no such thing as a license to carry firearms in PA
- There is the LTCF which is only required for concealed carry or any type of carry in the city of Philadelphia.
I think they need to work on the wording of that sentence.
The LTCF stands for License to Carry Firearms
30th St. Station is within the City of Philadelphia so I needed the LTCF.
Right - not thatI am encouraging open carriers in philadelphia to refuse to show LTCFs, but still, as a technical matter, as implied by the Fourth Amendment, and required by the UFA, there still needs to be a lawful demand for the LTCF - like, reasonable articulable suspicion that crime is afoot. See Terry v. Ohio; 18 Pa.C.S §6122a ("General rule.-When carrying a firearm concealed on or about one's person or in a vehicle, an individual licensed to carry a firearm shall, upon lawful demand of a law enforcement officer, produce the license for inspection");State v. Peters, 2008 WL 2185754 (Wis. App. I Dist. 2008) (holding no duty for vehicle driver to show driver's license to police on demand unless police have reasonable articulable suspicion to conduct stop of driver;"We turn first to the investigative traffic stop, often called a Terry stop. The law of investigative stops allows police officers to stop a person when they have less than probable cause. State v. Waldner, 206 Wis.2d 51, 59, 556 N.W.2d 681 (1996). To justify an investigatory seizure, the police must have a reasonable suspicion, grounded in specific articulable facts and reasonable inferences from those facts, that an individual is violating or has violated the law. State v. Colstad, 2003 WI App 25, ¶ 8, 260 Wis.2d 406, 659 N.W.2d 394. “The question of what constitutes reasonable suspicion is a common sense test: under all the facts and circumstances present, what would a reasonable police officer reasonably suspect in light of his or her training and experience.” State v. Young, 212 Wis.2d 417, 424, 569 N.W.2d 84 (Ct.App.1997).").
You are ALL 100% correct
but that said, remember folks where you are talking about. I am a PA State Constable, a law enforcement officer and also know lots of other officers including PA State Police that when off duty
will not carry openly there because this is Philly. I do not need a LTCF but still am very very weary of carrying there even concealed. If I am stopped for a brief time it doesnt kill me, it justslows me down a little but I understand why. Yes I know your thinking but if you allow that to happen then it always will. Just try folks to put yourself in those officers shoes for one minute, I am not saying have your rights stomped on but just try to see where the officer is coming from, especially there.
He doesnt care if you sue him or the department, he or she just wants to make it home that night to his or her husband and children and make sure you and the other people around do, thats all, SAFTY first and foremost. Now if your treated like dirt for no reason or held up for a long period of time then ok but alls I am saying is just
try to see it from the officers standpoint and seeing all his or her fellow officers
daily being killed or shot at etc.
I am not saying that you cant and you have a right to but what I am saying is down that way the law enforcement officers are dropping like flies so they are weary to ALL and you mention constitutional right to them and they dont care, go ahead and sue, they again dont care because of the the officer and "Joe Public" being shot.
Does that give them the right to do what they are doing.....no but remember, where ones rights end another persons rights begin.
