Opposition to National Reciprocity from Former PPD Commish

This seems like a silly assertion:

Twelve states — including Pennsylvania’s neighbor, West Virginia — do not require any permit or training to carry hidden loaded guns in public. If this bill becomes law, almost any person from these states would instantly be able to carry concealed in Pennsylvania, regardless of whether that person meets the commonwealth’s standards for carrying a concealed gun in public. This not only puts communities in danger, it makes it harder for law enforcement officers to do their jobs.

Surely we have such strict standards! Last I checked, if you can come up with 20 bucks and clear a PICS check you can get an LTC in Pennsylvania. It’s usually the other states that use us a bogey man.

It’s also funny that Ramesy talks a good game on how well trained police are, when under his watch at the PPD, the US DOJ found that training for his department was substandard.

Also recall, that this is the same guy who was allegedly carrying around a firearm without legally being a sworn police officer in Pennsylvania.

13 Responses to “Opposition to National Reciprocity from Former PPD Commish”

  1. Weer'd Beard says:

    Also nobody has EVER used “loaded hidden guns” in reference to Concealed Carry earnestly.

    That is a purpose-made talking point of the anti-gun groups…specifically if I remember correctly Michael Bloomberg.

    Also since it is such an unnatural way of framing what has become a commonly known activity I suspect it will fall flat.

    Plus the HUGE number of people who have carry permits, and from States like Massachusetts or Illinois who drag you over the coals, to states like Pennsylvania where the process is “Why bother”

    I think everybody involved sees the permit as both pointless and a huge bother.

    • Whetherman says:

      “since it is such an unnatural way of framing what has become a commonly known activity…”

      “Loaded hidden guns” is also unnatural in that it certainly doesn’t roll easily off the tongue, so doesn’t have the makings for incorporation into good sound-bites.

      Be thankful when our opponents don’t have the sense to employ really skilled PR people or propagandists. Just saying something doesn’t make it good propaganda.

  2. Anon says:

    Ramsey must long for the days when he was Chief in the People’s Republic of DC… no permits at all.

  3. Richard says:

    I am waiting for Weatherman to check in. I predict he will raise the specter of Federal control. But really, he will be with Schumer.

    • Weer'd Beard says:

      Looks like his hypomanic episode has ended.

      • Richard says:

        He was still there in Sebastian’s previous post. I expect him back under a new nom de guerre at some point.

    • Whetherman says:

      “I predict he will raise the specter of Federal control.”

      Heh, see my point, Dick? Guys like you get pissed off, but you remember what I said. ;-)

  4. dwb says:

    PA is a “constitutional” open carry state.

    The $20 and LTC is so the Sheriff knows you know how to cover it with a t-shirt??

    • Whetherman says:

      “PA is a “constitutional” open carry state.”

      It has been for well over 50 years. But back in the day they would bust you for something else, like “disturbing the peace.”

      • Whetherman says:

        “It has been for well over 50 years.”

        Here’s something I admit I never quite “got”:

        Open Carry has always been legal in PA (at least while I’ve been alive, I think) but I’ve never been sure how that fit with the requirement that you obtain a “provisional firearms permit” to carry a handgun while fishing or hunting. Perhaps it was the acts of fishing or hunting?

        The “provisional” permit was pro forma and available from county tresurers for something like $0.75. But to go off on a bit of a tangent, Tom Ridge’s Uniform Firearms Act, as passed in 1995, made it a felony to be without it, and thus, lose all your firearms rights for the rest of your life. I don’t believe that was ever enforced on anyone, and that was fixed by subsequent legislation a couple years later, but it made the so-called “provisional firearms permit” an odd factor in the mix of handgun carry scenarios at the time.

      • dwb says:

        well over 50 years times 5.

        I think the point went over your head.

        Point is, if you can carry one openly with no permit, it’s not extra special scary unsafe to carry it tucked in a waistband.

        • Whetherman says:

          “I think the point went over your head.”

          And mine in turn may have gone over yours.

          For as long as “Open Carry” may have existed under the law, all it meant was that they couldn’t bust you for the act itself, because no law existed saying it was a crime. They had nothing to write down. But depending on where you lived, they would bust you for something else, when in fact it was the Open Carrying they objected to. It is only in relatively recent years that mainly suburban police have been forced to acknowledge that in the absence of state legislation prohibiting it, it must be treated as a right.

          Through most of my adulthood PA was de facto, at least, a “may issue” state, with carry permits effectively administered by local police chiefs. I declined to attempt to obtain one until c. 1990, because up to that point you had to identify (including the serial number) at least one gun you intended to carry; which I would not do for pragmatic reasons.

          But really the point of all that is, that whatever the law may have been, reality has varied over time. Article I, Section 21 of the state constitution has always said what it says (see the masthead above), but anyone who takes it too literally has a cruel surprise coming. And as a constitutional provision it has been verbatim since the Constitution of 1790.

  5. DC says:

    Just called Patrick Meehan to ask why he isn’t co-sponsoring HR 38. Got a dodge, will call back.

    Has everyone called their congress critter?