pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
State Park OC Test
#21
streaker69;139755 Wrote:
Curmudgeon;139732 Wrote:On a related note, PennDOT has seen fit to put up "no guns" symbols on many of their centers, and at least one person has had a problem as a result of it.

Is this not the same thing?

There was an update to that thread yesterday, you may have missed it. PennDOT came out and said that the majority of their centers are managed by a private entity, so it's a private property issue that they claim to have no control over.

So as I postulated, an agency or municipality that's under preemption could easily lease their land to a "management" organization and that group could then set very strict rules.

I don't buy it. It sounds like UniqueSource merely trains and provides workers for the photo id centers, not that they own the property, and not that they can dictate policy to a state agency.

http://www.uniquesource.com/about/StaffBiographies.asp
“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

William Pitt
Reply
#22
The issue needs to be pushed further to be sure.
Reply
#23
streaker69;139761 Wrote:The issue needs to be pushed further to be sure.

I sent a PM to DC Dalton, he has had contact with Kim Stolfer about this, and briefly tried to bring him up to speed, but I'm working nights and I've been up since 3pm yesterday. I need to get some sleep bfore going back in tonight.
“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

William Pitt
Reply
#24
That would never hold up in court. Never.

streaker69;139755 Wrote:
Curmudgeon;139732 Wrote:On a related note, PennDOT has seen fit to put up "no guns" symbols on many of their centers, and at least one person has had a problem as a result of it.

Is this not the same thing?

There was an update to that thread yesterday, you may have missed it. PennDOT came out and said that the majority of their centers are managed by a private entity, so it's a private property issue that they claim to have no control over.

So as I postulated, an agency or municipality that's under preemption could easily lease their land to a "management" organization and that group could then set very strict rules.
Reply
#25
ExcelToExcel;139767 Wrote:That would never hold up in court. Never.

streaker69;139755 Wrote:There was an update to that thread yesterday, you may have missed it. PennDOT came out and said that the majority of their centers are managed by a private entity, so it's a private property issue that they claim to have no control over.

So as I postulated, an agency or municipality that's under preemption could easily lease their land to a "management" organization and that group could then set very strict rules.

It may in combination with Footnote 9 from the Erie case. If the municipalities can assert their private property rights, it may hold. Considering that we have an appellate court that found that PA residents are not "a person".
Reply
#26
streaker69;139769 Wrote:
ExcelToExcel;139767 Wrote:That would never hold up in court. Never.

It may in combination with Footnote 9 from the Erie case. If the municipalities can assert their private property rights, it may hold. Considering that we have an appellate court that found that PA residents are not "a person".

ain't gonna happen. Didn't the Erie case done get won on appeal?
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Chatted with open carrier in state park. JustinHEMI 28 4,280 11-12-2013, 10:23 PM
Last Post: Stonewall



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

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