pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
Pittsburger arrested for OC
#21
Good point...thanks, BH. Truly, it seems though as the story has some holes in it. And his comparing it to carrying an Airsoft gun is just deflection. I have heard of guys getting yanked for DC while OCing...AND CCing. Seems like a discretionary charge by the coppers - sometimes used for teaching folks lessons...

We've got LEOs here...any ideas, fellahs?
With cheese, Grommet.
Reply
#22
Cherokee60;20235 Wrote:Good point...thanks, BH. Truly, it seems though as the story has some holes in it. And his comparing it to carrying an Airsoft gun is just deflection. I have heard of guys getting yanked for DC while OCing...AND CCing. Seems like a discretionary charge by the coppers - sometimes used for teaching folks lessons...

We've got LEOs here...any ideas, fellahs?

DC doesn't prohibit ownership or possession of firearms though. It's essentially a pay a fine charge. DC also requires specific conditions to be met otherwise the charge is usually dropped.
"As I lay rubber down the street I pray for traction I can keep, but if I spin and begin to slide, please dear God, protect my sweet ride."
Reply
#23
The act of carrying a firearm, OC or CC, does not support a charge of disorderly conduct. From the MPOTEC annual training presentation:

Officers should be aware that citizens may become alarmed or concerned when
they witness persons engaged in open carry. This may be due in part to individual
sensibilities regarding firearms and the fact that persons engaged in open carry are
infrequently encountered in Pennsylvania. However, a citizen’s alarm or concern
does not alone negatively impact the rights of a person engaging in the lawful open
carrying of a firearm. Officers receiving citizen reports of a “man with a gun”
would be prudent to respond to determine the nature of the report. However, the
rights of any person engaged in the lawful open carrying of a firearm must be
carefully considered when interacting with such person. Persons engaged in the
lawful open carrying of a firearm are not subject to seizure of their person or
property based solely on the fact that they are engaging in open carry, nor may they
be required to produce identification or other documents. A person who is
engaging in open carry in Philadelphia or in an area of declared emergency may be
required to produce a valid and lawfully issued license to carry a firearm or
establish an exemption. Of course, a person engaged in the open carrying of a
firearm may engage in violations of other laws or handle the firearm in an
inappropriate manner which could constitute offenses such as: disorderly conduct,
reckless endangerment, simple assault by physical menace, etc. However, merely
engaging in the open carrying of a firearm would not necessarily constitute such an
offense.
headcase, bitch-slapping gun myth perpetuators since 2006.
Reply
#24
The guy appears to be in the category of people whom I consider to be misinformed and not too swift, that's just the impression I get from watching his video. From reading the comments here it seems as though he may not take advice and criticism very well, especially when it isn't what he wants to hear. I think he may not be telling the whole story but if he's accurate when stating that he was simply sitting at a bus stop to take a phone call while open carrying, (who stops what they're doing to take a phone call? Shrug), the arrest was unjustified and that should be the focus here.
If he was doing something other than openly carrying while minding his own business that could be a game changer, depending on the circumstances.
Based on what he said, the arrest was wrong. Based on my opinion of him from his video, he very well may have brought this on himself by something that wasn't mentioned. I don't know enough about this specific situation to have a firm opinion one way or another but I'm leaning toward an unjustified arrest in spite of him being misinformed about the particulars. Anyone of legal age with no prohibiting offenses should be able to sit anywhere in a public setting with an openly carried firearm without being arrested.
I've seen video compilations of arrests where the arrested person says (s)he was "just minding my own business, not doing anything wrong" but the video shows some pretty wild and strange, even violent behavior leading up to the arrest.
I just searched and can't find a video now, maybe someone can help me out, but the point is that things aren't always as they appear and his is only one side of the story.
There are three types of people in the world:
Those who make things happen,
Those who watch things happen,
And those who wonder what happened.
Reply
#25
cgbudde;20106 Wrote:
Valorius;20021 Wrote:You could be right, i didn't follow the whole saga. I'm just sayin'...it's normal for people to get defensive when they -feel- like they're being picked on. Even if they're not getting picked on.

But yeah, young guys do tend to know everything.

When I talk to people and they tell me they have a handgun in the house for protection or for tarket shooting I always ask why they do not have a ltcf. And yes I will mention that, unless they have something on their record that prevents them from having one,. Now if you get an attitude because of that too bad. And yes he is a young punk and Joe tried to speak to him with respect, but none was given back. He was also told to get a lawyer and all I see is this video being posted on here and pafoa. That tells me he wants sympothy not advice. So I don't give a rats ass if he losses his 2nd Amendment rights.

You seem kind of hostile...isn't this kid on "our side?" Or is he a bad guy because he didn't exercise his rights as we think he should have?

headcase;20174 Wrote:
ArcticSplash;20027 Wrote:And now he's got a PUFA charge and can't own any firearms until he gets a gun lawyer to fight it off.

Sad? No. Dunce? Yes.


If you want to be a test case, you need to have your lawyer read the law back to you, then read the law YOURSELF and understand it completely. If you can't read legal text (and the PUFA law is NOT like reading a deep-level comp sci text, folks).... then well, maybe you shouldn't be carrying--because the law that was written for you to carry a firearm is the same law that will back your ass up if you are ever arrested under false pretenses.

Castle Doctrine is an even easier read. It's not like it is complicated tax code or anything.
I've read this ten times, and I still don't know what the hell this has to do with the OP....

I guess you'll have to read it at least once more, won't you? Wink
Reply
#26
Cherokee60;20215 Wrote:The good news is that he knows everything...so we can all just relax.

The bad news, of course, is that he's not telling the whole story, and that'll f^*k you up every time. (Preparing to get on a bus could be construed as attempting to conceal within a vehicle, right?)

maybe. But since when do they arrest you before you have committed the crime?
[Image: image.php?type=sigpic&userid=2638&dateline=1255032341][Image: 180-180-allied-light.png]

Trolls will be trolls. You know who you are.

Normanvin, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#27
Normanvin;20389 Wrote:maybe. But since when do they arrest you before you have committed the crime?

Since about June of 1973. Wink

Quote:Criminal attempt. (18 Pa. C.S.§901)
(a) DEFINITION OF ATTEMPT. - A person commits an attempt when, with intent to commit a specific crime, he does any act which constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of that crime.
The Second Amendment does not GIVE us the right. It tells the gov they can not infringe our right.
[Image: s2b0iw.jpg]
Reply
#28
Valorius;20342 Wrote:[quote=cgbudde;20106]

When I talk to people and they tell me they have a handgun in the house for protection or for tarket shooting I always ask why they do not have a ltcf. And yes I will mention that, unless they have something on their record that prevents them from having one,. Now if you get an attitude because of that too bad. And yes he is a young punk and Joe tried to speak to him with respect, but none was given back. He was also told to get a lawyer and all I see is this video being posted on here and pafoa. That tells me he wants sympothy not advice. So I don't give a rats ass if he losses his 2nd Amendment rights.

You seem kind of hostile...isn't this kid on "our side?" Or is he a bad guy because he didn't exercise his rights as we think he should have?

I have now idea who's side he is on. And I don't care how anyone exercises their 2nd amendmend rights, but when you come off with a I know it better than anyone attitude then fuck you when you get jamned up. He seems to know it all, I refuse to feel sorry for him, or would offer any advice. and if that bothers others, well then ban me from this site or use the ignore feature.
cgbudde, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#29
kadar;20394 Wrote:
Normanvin;20389 Wrote:maybe. But since when do they arrest you before you have committed the crime?

Since about June of 1973. Wink

Quote:Criminal attempt. (18 Pa. C.S.§901)
(a) DEFINITION OF ATTEMPT. - A person commits an attempt when, with intent to commit a specific crime, he does any act which constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of that crime.

An attempt is not before. He was not attempting to board a bus. He was not attempting to possess a firearm within a vehicle or other conveyance without a license. Attempt must also be proven and based on articulable
facts which reasonably conclude evidence of attempt. Standing at a bus stop doesn't prove intent or attempt to possess a firearm within a vehicle or other conveyance without a license. Proximity is not attempt or intent.
"As I lay rubber down the street I pray for traction I can keep, but if I spin and begin to slide, please dear God, protect my sweet ride."
Reply
#30
You can not be charged with DC or terrorist threats for lawful OC of a firearm.
It is simple, get a lawyer and bring up commonwealth v.Ortiz and commonwealth v. Hawkins in court.

http://paopencarry.org/pa-firearm-law-ss5503

Can I be charged with "brandishing" or "disturbing the peace" if I open carry in PA?

Short answer: Yes, you could be charged with a number of violations by an unknowing LEO. BUT, the charges would not be applicable, per the statutes, for merely open carrying. Commonwealth v. Hawkins 1996 clearly states that open carry, in and of itself, lacking any actual threatening or illegal behavior on the part of the person open carrying, is not grounds for a "stop and ID" by police. As such, open carry can not be anything warranting a "stop and ID" or greater reaction such as detainment or arrest.

Long answer: There is no "brandishing" or "disturbing the peace" law in PA. The most often threatened charges against someone open carrying is "disorderly conduct", and "terroristic threats".

§ 5503. Disorderly conduct.

Offense defined. -- A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he:
engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior;
makes unreasonable noise;
uses obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or
creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.

Though this section does not deal with firearms, due to the nature of this code, this law has been cited by officers to suppress or discourage lawful open carry. Since a person who is not licensed per §6109 or exempted by §6106(b) MUST open carry their firearms on foot in order to avoid criminal charge, nor is there any duty for anyone licensed to conceal their handgun, open carry is not disorderly conduct. The open carrying of firearms is not by itself threatening, nor does it cause a hazardous or physically offensive condition. There are also two cases that that specifically state that a person may carry a firearm openly: Commonwealth v. Ortiz and Commonwealth v. Hawkins.

In summary, with case law to support, OC is legal and does "serve a legitimate purpose of the actor". Therefore OC can not be Disorderly Conduct per the letter of the code itself.

§ 2706. Terroristic threats.

Offense defined. A person commits the crime of terroristic threats if the person communicates, either directly or indirectly, a threat to: commit any crime of violence with intent to terrorize another; cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation; or otherwise cause serious public inconvenience, or cause terror or serious public inconvenience with reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience.
Definition. -- As used in this section, the term "communicates" means conveys in person or by written or electronic means, including telephone, electronic mail, Internet, facsimile, telex and similar transmissions.

As with disorderly conduct, this code section has been used to suppress or discourage lawful open carry. “Convey” means to communicate, either orally or by written or electronic means. Because the open carry of firearms is not a communication as defined by this section, it cannot be terroristic threatening.

Also, again, Commonwealth v. Hawkins 1996 clearly states that open carry, in and of itself, lacking any actual threatening or illegal behavior on the part of the person open carrying is not grounds for even a "stop and ID" by police. As such, open carry can not be anything warranting a "stop and ID" or greater reaction such as detainment or arrest.
DON'T TREAD ON ME.
One Man Wolf Pack.
Always stay invisible.
Proud to be a loser at PA2A Whack
Reply






Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Vancouver, WA: Lawful OC'er get arrested bigdawgbeav 6 2,036 07-07-2014, 06:30 PM
Last Post: goofin
  OC'er Arrested in Philly bigdawgbeav 142 21,798 04-02-2014, 05:12 PM
Last Post: gnbrotz



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

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