pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
Amish man challenges photo ID requirement to buy firearms
#1
Quote:

Facebook
0
Twitter
0
livefyre
3
Email

Print



WILLIAMSPORT, Pa. – An Amish resident of central Pennsylvania is challenging the photo identification requirement to purchase a firearm, saying his religious beliefs prevent him from being photographed.

PennLive.com reports that Andrew Hertzler argues in a suit filed Friday in U.S. Middle District Court that the requirement violates his religious freedom and his constitutional right to possess a firearm.

Hertzler said his beliefs as a member of an Amish community in Lancaster County bar photographs being taken of him, but he was prohibited from buying a gun in June for self-defense purposes.

The lawsuit said Hertzler could get a federal firearms license to deal in guns without a photograph but has no desire to do that. He contends that the state's non-photo ID along with other documentation should be sufficient.

He should scream discrimination!
Reply
#2
I read this on the other site but didn't realize how local this really was.

FWIW, there are plenty of amish with photo LTCF's around here let alone photo ID's and drivers licenses.
[Image: picsay-1358258813.jpg]
Reply
#3
More importantly, why should he require to show an ID at all? Why should anyone?
Unbanned since September 2012.
Reply
#4
With the recent SAFE Act ruling, I wish him luck with that
"There is no hunting like the hunting of man. And those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter."
-Ernest Hemingway
Reply
#5
Not sure exactly what community Andrew Hertzler belongs to, I can almost bet he isn't a Clinton County resident and probably either lives in the White Deer area or Nippenose Valley. There aren't any Hertzlers in this area from what I could gather.

Another thing that might be noted is filing lawsuits may also conflict with his ordnung. This whole thing sorta stinks a little. So, if he loses, does that mean votor ID may get a second look?
[Image: picsay-1358258813.jpg]
Reply
#6
The whole voter ID thing is ridiculous. During the course of everyday life, you have to whip out your photo ID for all sorts of things. The only people who could possibly be angry about voter ID are those who are not citizens or have other dishonest reasons not to want to own up to who they are on election day.

As far as this case... I don't know that religion should be allowed to bend gun laws, such as they are. There is a reason for showing photo ID when purchasing a gun. Many reasons, actually. So if we make an exception to that, then anyone can walk in and claim to be Amish, and then show a random ID, and make a straw purchase, or whatever else. I actually have no problem showing a photo ID to purchase a gun. I have to show it to buy Sudafed, LOL, so why not a gun? But there shouldn't be exceptions, IMO.
Error 396: Signature cannot be found.
Reply
#7
Another fair weather friend of the 2A.
Unbanned since September 2012.
Reply
#8
jahwarrior72;169906 Wrote:Another fair weather friend of the 2A.


Not really.... Do you show your photo ID when you buy alcohol? Fly on a plane? Buy Sudafed?

Showing ID is no breach of privacy unless they are entering the card into their system.
Error 396: Signature cannot be found.
Reply
#9
RugerGirl;169907 Wrote:
jahwarrior72;169906 Wrote:Another fair weather friend of the 2A.


Not really.... Do you show your photo ID when you buy alcohol? Fly on a plane? Buy Sudafed?

Showing ID is no breach of privacy unless they are entering the card into their system.

Yes, really. No, I don't show photo ID when buying booze, because I'm obviously over 21. I don't fly anywhere. I buy Sudafed, and I verbally voice my disgust every time I have to hand over my ID. What do these have in common? None of these are things are explicitly described as rights.

I shouldn't need to have a license to carry a gun, or require any government permission to exercise a natural right. It's bullshit. I don't need photo ID to purchase any number of things.

Like I said: fair weather friend of the 2A. What you see as no inconvenience, I see as an abridgement to my rights. But whatever, as long as you're not inconvenienced.
Unbanned since September 2012.
Reply
#10
Are we seriously debating the differences between constitutional rights and things that are not? And are we seriously trying to justify infringements of constitutional rights by comparing them to privileges that are not?

Shall not be infringed. Shall not be questioned. End of story.
[Image: picsay-1358258813.jpg]
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Would you buy these targets? bac0nfat 62 6,832 08-11-2016, 09:04 PM
Last Post: Mr_Gixxer
  What Do You Use To Protect Your Firearms? das 11 1,368 10-31-2015, 07:50 PM
Last Post: spblademaker
  4 Firearms Myths That Bad Guys Believe And You Shouldn’t das 0 918 05-07-2015, 07:26 AM
Last Post: das
  Shipping Firearms and Ammo Xringshooter 7 3,456 04-17-2015, 10:31 AM
Last Post: Xringshooter
  Anyone Looking to Buy a Sig Brace This place has Them das 9 2,009 01-24-2015, 02:49 PM
Last Post: bac0nfat



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.