pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
Home Depot now requires you to show LTCF
#11
Doesn't the Confidentiality Clause protect us from busy-bodies?

6111(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.
The Second Amendment does not GIVE us the right. It tells the gov they can not infringe our right.
[Image: s2b0iw.jpg]
Reply
#12
It's curious to me how so many people who work in retail, and know nothing about guns or the UFA, somehow know "the law". A branch manager of Penn Security Bank & Trust Company, the South Side Scranton branch, insisted quite rudely that only LEO and federal employees were allowed to carry guns in banks, and that I was violation of federal ans state law by carryng in a bank. I posted about it over on Poofa years ago, if anyone's bored and needs a good laugh. They lost a few thousand dollars in business over that.
Unbanned since September 2012.
Reply
#13
Honestly it's private property, their rules. I would just take my money elsewhere, and make sure the people who are really in charge know about it.
Reply
#14
(02-09-2014, 10:21 PM)bac0nfat Wrote: Honestly it's private property, their rules. I would just take my money elsewhere, and make sure the people who are really in charge know about it.

Exactly. I always preferred Lowes anyway.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2
MechaHead, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Aug 2013.
Reply
#15
I don't see the issue. It's private property, and in exchange for you carrying in their store they want you to show an LTCF. Don't like it, don't shop there. Like it or not, their property rights trump your right to carry.
Shadowline, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#16
Shadowline;134451 Wrote:I don't see the issue. It's private property, and in exchange for you carrying in their store they want you to show an LTCF. Don't like it, don't shop there. Like it or not, their property rights trump your right to carry.

I never said that they did not have a right to require you to have a ltcf, but if that is in fact their corporate policy then it is a new one and people should be aware of it. That means that they no longer allow OC without a license.

More restrictions makes me believe they will eventually say no firearms at all, if most stores have no firearms policies then having a ltcf really is no good because you will not be able to carry anywhere but public property. If you are ok with having to show your ltcf then that is fine but if you are not then I would encourage people to contact corporate
Stonewall, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#17
Shadowline;134451 Wrote:I don't see the issue. It's private property, and in exchange for you carrying in their store they want you to show an LTCF. Don't like it, don't shop there. Like it or not, their property rights trump your right to carry.

The issue isn't that they insist on an individual be licensed, the issue is that they believe an individual needs to be licensed to open carry, and that believe state law gives them the right to demand you provide proof. The private property issue is a separate matter, I believe, and nothing gives them the right to demand ID; that right is reserved for LEO.
Unbanned since September 2012.
Reply
#18
jahwarrior72;134461 Wrote:nothing gives them the right to demand ID; that right is reserved for LEO.

The 2 are totally intertwined. The fact that it's private property gives them the right to decide who enters and under what conditions as long as they don't discriminate against certain protected classes of race, religion and divisibility.
Take this trouble for me: Make sure my shepherd dog remains a working dog, for I have struggled all my life long for that aim ~ Max von Stephanitz

Reply
#19
Exbiker;134462 Wrote:
jahwarrior72;134461 Wrote:nothing gives them the right to demand ID; that right is reserved for LEO.

The 2 are totally intertwined. The fact that it's private property gives them the right to decide who enters and under what conditions as long as they don't discriminate against certain protected classes of race, religion and divisibility.

Again, the issue isn't about their right to deny service, it's that they believe state law gives them the right to demand an individual to present ID (it doesn't), and that state law requires an individual be licensed to carry on private property (it doesn't). They can discriminate against an armed person all day long, as far as I'm concerned, and put up signs saying "No black, dogs, or Irish" over their doors. But there is no law, in any book, anywhere, that says they have the legal right to demand an armed erson provide a LTCF.
Unbanned since September 2012.
Reply
#20
jahwarrior72;134463 Wrote:Again, the issue isn't about their right to deny service, it's that they believe state law gives them the right to demand an individual to present ID (it doesn't), and that state law requires an individual be licensed to carry on private property (it doesn't). They can discriminate against an armed person all day long, as far as I'm concerned, and put up signs saying "No black, dogs, or Irish" over their doors. But there is no law, in any book, anywhere, that says they have the legal right to demand an armed erson provide a LTCF.

Again even if they believed there was a law that doesn't matter because it's their right. They can believe it or just lie, either way it's their right.
The prudent thing to do would be to either show the licence and then educate or leave then educate with a print out of the law or a flier.
They do have legal right to demand to see a LTCF in order to access their private property if they choose. They are not under oath so then can bluff about reason all they want.
Take this trouble for me: Make sure my shepherd dog remains a working dog, for I have struggled all my life long for that aim ~ Max von Stephanitz

Reply






Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Personal Home & Defense Magazine article donotknowme 2 1,154 10-23-2012, 07:11 PM
Last Post: NuclearSociety



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

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