pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
PA Superior Court Rules Against McKown - Major blow to non-resident permit holders
#21
Simply put, Soberbyker Nailed it correctly.
Fundamentals, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#22
My apologies for any confusion with how I worded my post....thank for clarifying it Sober!
steelcityk9cop, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#23
What if you lived in one county and obtained your ltcf. Then you move to another county. Is it still valid even though it is now not from your county of residence?
Reply
#24
thefirstndsecond;123220 Wrote:What if you lived in one county and obtained your ltcf. Then you move to another county. Is it still valid even though it is now not from your county of residence?

Yes. (see Post #19) You are supposed to notify them of your new address, but that helps you as well so that you get the renewal notice when your license is about to expire.
Reply
#25
mingomom;123222 Wrote:
thefirstndsecond;123220 Wrote:What if you lived in one county and obtained your ltcf. Then you move to another county. Is it still valid even though it is now not from your county of residence?

Yes. (see Post #19) You are supposed to notify them of your new address, but that helps you as well so that you get the renewal notice when your license is about to expire.

I don't recall anything in the law requiring a person to tell of a move until renewal, however, as mentioned, the sheriff's recommend it so you'll get proper notification when it's renewal time.
Reply
#26
soberbyker;123224 Wrote:
mingomom;123222 Wrote:Yes. (see Post #19) You are supposed to notify them of your new address, but that helps you as well so that you get the renewal notice when your license is about to expire.

I don't recall anything in the law requiring a person to tell of a move until renewal, however, as mentioned, the sheriff's recommend it so you'll get proper notification when it's renewal time.

I stand corrected. Thanks.
Reply
#27
mingomom;123222 Wrote:
thefirstndsecond;123220 Wrote:What if you lived in one county and obtained your ltcf. Then you move to another county. Is it still valid even though it is now not from your county of residence?

Yes. (see Post #19) You are supposed to notify them of your new address, but that helps you as well so that you get the renewal notice when your license is about to expire.

To note: the sheriffs love ignoring the fact that they are supposed to send you a renewal application, not a renewal notice.

They ignore the law & the courts just make things up to hand them more power. We are sliding towards may issue, just not legislatively.
IronSight, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#28
Concealment is not a privilege. Two state supreme courts have already read the Pennsylvania Declaration of Rights, particularly its right to bear arms, and have held on its basis that concealment is a right. The Pa. Supreme Court has never held otherwise by binding precedent. The citations are below.

Although the Superior Court (strangely) stated that Sheriff Denny Nau and/or his underlings are at best thieves and at wost burglars and official oppressors (Opinion of the Court, p. 26: "[The items] are not firearms, and as such, the sheriff had no authority upon which to seize them in the first place."), Hobson lost all other issues before the 3-judge panel. Apparently, no pro-gun person or organization, local, state, or national, offered to help Hobson directly nor did they bother to file an amicus brief; yet, Philly filed an amicus brief and got exactly what it asked for.

Apparently this loss is of no significance, because according to http://cases.hobsonlylemckown.com, Hobson McKown intended to take this case to the Pa. Supreme Court from the moment he was arrested, and announced that is where it will now go. Because of a tendency of Pa. courts to avoid constitutional issues for alleged mootness (against the tide of Pa. cases adjudging the judicial duty to observe and declare void that which is void), a victory at trial court or Superior Court would not be satisfactory when the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has never creating binding precedent on the right to bear arms while two other states beat this high court to that very task.

cases.hobsonlylemckown.com Wrote:In the early 19th century, Mister Bliss, an alleged criminal, was convicted by a jury at trial court. He appealed. In 1822, the Kentucky High (Supreme) Court rendered the right to bear arms absolute. Bliss v. Commonwealth, 12 Littell 90 (Ky. 1822).
In the early 20th century, Andrew Rosenthal, an alleged criminal, was convicted at trial court. He appealed. In 1903, the Vermont Supreme Court rendered the right to bear arms absolute. State v. Rosenthal, 55 A. 610 (Vt. 1903).
In the early 21st century, Hobson McKown, an alleged criminal, was convicted at trial court. Commonwealth v. Hobson Lyle McKown, 2013 PA Super 282, --- A.3d ---- (Pa.Super. 2013). He appealed. Will the Pennsylvania Supreme Court do the centennial duty of rendering the right to bear arms absolute?

P.S. the same things keep popping up. Four points to be addressed:

1) Firearms licensing is not like driver licensing. We know that the legislature knows how to implement a system that bans all licenses when any license is disabled. See 75 Pa.C.S. 1503(a): "The department shall not issue a driver's license to, or renew the driver's license of, any person: (1) Whose operating privilege is suspended or revoked in this or any other state. . . . (9) Who is not a resident of this Commonwealth." and 75 Pa.C.S. 1532 "The department shall suspend the operating privilege of any driver . . ." where 'operating privilege' is not actually a 'license' but is, according to 75 Pa.C.S. 102, "The privilege to apply for and obtain a license to use as well as the privilege to use a vehicle on a highway as authorized in this title, but not a contract, property right or civil right." Further note the Driver License Compact which states under 75 Pa.C.S. 1581, art. IV(a), "The licensing authority in the home state, for the purposes of suspension, revocation or limitation of the license to operate a motor vehicle, shall give the same effect to the conduct reported . . . as it would if such conduct had occurred in the home state[.]" Can any of you find this type of language anywhere in the Uniform Firearms Act?

2) At the preliminary hearing, Denny Nau testified that he called New Hampshire State Police on the day of the 9/2/2008 incident and was told the NH pistol/revolver permit-license was valid. The question of alleged 'backdating' or when NHSP received the application, processed the application, or issued the license are void. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire recognizes that "The maxim omnia presumuntur rite esse acta is well established, and its application to acts of public officers is recognized in numerous adjudged cases in England and America." Shackford v. Town of Newington, 46 N.H. 415, 420-422 (N.H. 1866). Until someone can prove an irregular administrative process, the presumption is that the officials exercised due care and carried that process out. NHSP told Denny Nau, which he testified at the preliminary hearing regarding, that they would take action to revoke Hobson's permit-license. Within 2 weeks, NHSP issued a revocation letter, although I do not rememeber whether this was proven at the preliminary hearing, Habeas/Limine hearing, or the Limine rehearing. NH has a specific revocation process, which is not to void the license ab initio. "The issuing authority may order a license to carry a loaded pistol or revolver issued to any person pursuant to RSA 159:6 to be suspended or revoked for just cause, provided written notice of the suspension or revocation and the reason therefore is given to the licensee." 12 N.H. R.S.A. 159:6-b(I). So, to make this clear for everyone, Hobson was arrested on 9/2, at which time NHSP said he had a valid license. Days later he was issued a revocation notice from NHSP. It can't get any more clear than that. The Pa. Superior Court stupidly looked at the NHSP website without referencing NH law whatsoever -- what they found on the website has been there for a few years YET it was not there for YEARS AFTER Hobson's arrest. A court can't take 'judicial notice' of something that isn't law (the website) without an adversarial hearing for them to put it on the record, especially at the appellate level, and they have the opportunity for evidentiary hearings if they want, to decide the law of another state.

3) Three different judges gave three different reasons for the defendant's non-licensure, non-personhood, or non-validity. Dutchcot (preliminary hearing) said he wasn't a valid person, perhaps accepting innuendo that Hobson 'backdated' his application (by 1 day?) without having those facts placed on record. Milliron (motion to declare statute unconstitutional) said he wondered about the validity of the permit-license... not delcared Hobson wasn't licensed, HE SIMPLY WONDERED. Lunsford (Habeas and Motion in Limine) decided that Hobson had to apply for a NH permit to his sheriff. Trial court judges aren't supposed to overrule these things over and over again, and in fact, the Superior Court picked Milliron's reason out... except that Milliron didn't declare the license invalid, he simply and clearly begged the question. How does a defendant fight the ever-changing reason his license or exception isn't valid or lawfully issue?

4) For everyone crying about having their rights screwed over, when the case either goes en banc to the Superior Court or otherwise to the Pa. Supreme Court, the Superior Court ruling can be vacated or stayed, rendering all of its 'screwing over' void. That means although you can be mad about it the rest of your life, any power that you perceive this ruling to have will be very brief. It's admittedly a mess here, but you can find the allowance for the type of stay that would occur somewhere in the following chapter: http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/210/ch...17toc.html
MDJschool, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Dec 2012.
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
cone IT IS ABSOLUTELY IMPERATIVE THAT YOU VOTE TOMORROW, NOV 3 - PA SUPREME COURT ArcticSplash 38 3,545 11-05-2015, 08:22 AM
Last Post: 39Flathead
  HB 80 Rep Evankovich Concealed Carry Permit Reciprocity 2015-2016 soberbyker 2 880 01-15-2015, 04:52 PM
Last Post: soberbyker
  Supreme Court: Pennsylvania cops no longer need a warrant to search citizens’ vehicle velkly 13 1,653 05-03-2014, 09:24 AM
Last Post: Ten*K
  PPD Gun Permit Unit ArcticSplash 11 2,666 11-20-2012, 06:57 PM
Last Post: rmagill
crosshair L&I Gun Permit Appeal Map In DN Article Today ArcticSplash 3 1,461 10-22-2012, 10:30 AM
Last Post: Cherokee60



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

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