Gun Decision Could Have Far Reaching Implications

signa · 06-09-2004, 12:49 PM

GUN DECISION COULD HAVE FAR REACHING IMPLICATIONS
Posted: June 8, 2004
1:16 AM Eastern
by NWV Staff Writer

© 2004 NewsWithViews.com

Many advocates for Americans’ right to keep and bear arms had reason to celebrate when they learned of a decision from Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas Senior Judge Robert Wolfe on May 19. Judge Wolfe's decision in favor of plaintiff Stanley Switzer of Jefferson County, ruled that a security ordinance allowing for metal detectors placed in doorways to courthouses for conducting weapons searches conflicts with state law. Pennsylvania’s law says no county may regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms.

State law regulates firearms in courthouses, saying that gun possession in a court facility is illegal. However, those court facilities only include courtrooms, district attorneys’ offices and judges’ chambers – not the entire building. Also at issue was whether local ordinances could override state law.

Mr. Switzer’s attorney, William Strong, argued successfully that the Jefferson County ordinance prohibiting his client from carrying a legally registered handgun into other county offices was an unconstitutional prohibition of his client’s rights. Mr. Switzer, a Korean War veteran, possesses a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Pennsylvania is a “shall issue” state with regard to concealed carry of weapons, meaning that local law enforcement must issue the permit if the applicant meets certain qualifications. Pursuant to Title 18 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, section 6109, law enforcement must issue a permit “if, after an investigation not exceeding 45 days, it appears that the applicant is an individual concerning whom no good cause exists to deny the license.”

The essence of Judge Wolfe’s ruling says that use of metal detectors and x-rays for security are permissible at the entrance to a courtroom, but not at a building’s point of entry.

Attorney William Strong predicted the judge’s ruling would have statewide impact. The ruling does not carry jurisdiction over similar ordinances in other counties in the Commonwealth, but when other plaintiffs challenge local ordinances, they will have the Jefferson County ruling as precedent from which to proceed in the Keystone State.
http://www.newswithviews.com/NWVexcl...xclusive21.htm

Shaun · 06-09-2004, 12:57 PM

Great Article Signa!

Rufus Rhastus J · 06-09-2004, 02:06 PM

It might be worthwhile to note, most areas, with CCW permits, regulate the same and add business's which primary business is alchoal and that also encludes post offices and all other government buildings. Guess that's probably not news but, just thought I'd mention it.

ScottD · 06-09-2004, 02:41 PM

Can't imagine why illegal at a post office. He77, it's normally the poatal workers you have to watch out for.

Have a uncle that has been a postal worker for 25+yrs. Spent some time with him a couple of summers ago. He found that I had an interest in firearms and wanted to know if I wanted to sell any of my handguns to him. Well, after visiting awhile I realized I probably saved countless lives in the St. Louis area by selling him anything. Geez, you never know.

Must be part of the job to be a little nutz to work there.

Big Dog · 06-09-2004, 04:03 PM

Our State Court building here in Tallahassee has the guard post and metal detector just inside the main entrance - the only entry point for the general public. I've never felt a problem with it. Armed security is there for a purpose. Out in town, it's a different matter. Gotta provide our own security!

Shaun · 06-09-2004, 04:17 PM

TN's requirement is no government buildings. BUt I have to agree we the tax payers own those buildings and should be able to access them without being disarmed.

ScottD · 06-09-2004, 04:40 PM

The key word to my above post that was missing is the word NOT. Sorry

dhermesc · 06-09-2004, 04:51 PM

Welcome aboard Signa - excellent first post!

Wish the guy (William Strong) who SUCCESSFULLY argued this case would handle a few other cases.

BattleRifleG3 · 06-09-2004, 05:54 PM

Glad to live in PA

06-09-2004, 12:49 PM	#1
signa Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: texas Posts: 53	Gun Decision Could Have Far Reaching Implications GUN DECISION COULD HAVE FAR REACHING IMPLICATIONS Posted: June 8, 2004 1:16 AM Eastern by NWV Staff Writer © 2004 NewsWithViews.com Many advocates for Americans’ right to keep and bear arms had reason to celebrate when they learned of a decision from Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas Senior Judge Robert Wolfe on May 19. Judge Wolfe's decision in favor of plaintiff Stanley Switzer of Jefferson County, ruled that a security ordinance allowing for metal detectors placed in doorways to courthouses for conducting weapons searches conflicts with state law. Pennsylvania’s law says no county may regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms. State law regulates firearms in courthouses, saying that gun possession in a court facility is illegal. However, those court facilities only include courtrooms, district attorneys’ offices and judges’ chambers – not the entire building. Also at issue was whether local ordinances could override state law. Mr. Switzer’s attorney, William Strong, argued successfully that the Jefferson County ordinance prohibiting his client from carrying a legally registered handgun into other county offices was an unconstitutional prohibition of his client’s rights. Mr. Switzer, a Korean War veteran, possesses a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Pennsylvania is a “shall issue” state with regard to concealed carry of weapons, meaning that local law enforcement must issue the permit if the applicant meets certain qualifications. Pursuant to Title 18 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, section 6109, law enforcement must issue a permit “if, after an investigation not exceeding 45 days, it appears that the applicant is an individual concerning whom no good cause exists to deny the license.” The essence of Judge Wolfe’s ruling says that use of metal detectors and x-rays for security are permissible at the entrance to a courtroom, but not at a building’s point of entry. Attorney William Strong predicted the judge’s ruling would have statewide impact. The ruling does not carry jurisdiction over similar ordinances in other counties in the Commonwealth, but when other plaintiffs challenge local ordinances, they will have the Jefferson County ruling as precedent from which to proceed in the Keystone State. http://www.newswithviews.com/NWVexcl...xclusive21.htm __________________ It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.~ Emiliano Zapata

06-09-2004, 12:57 PM	#2
Shaun Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 8,619 Images: 1	Great Article Signa! __________________ "Homeland Security is the responsibility of an armed citizen" ME http://webpages.charter.net/s.s.v/

06-09-2004, 02:06 PM	#3
Rufus Rhastus J Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: West, Central Florida, Third World America Posts: 6,339 Images: 1	It might be worthwhile to note, most areas, with CCW permits, regulate the same and add business's which primary business is alchoal and that also encludes post offices and all other government buildings. Guess that's probably not news but, just thought I'd mention it. __________________ "They cannot be trusted.....The Romulans (our politicos) are without honor." Worf

06-09-2004, 02:41 PM	#4
ScottD Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Evanston, IL Posts: 1,020	Can't imagine why illegal at a post office. He77, it's normally the poatal workers you have to watch out for. Have a uncle that has been a postal worker for 25+yrs. Spent some time with him a couple of summers ago. He found that I had an interest in firearms and wanted to know if I wanted to sell any of my handguns to him. Well, after visiting awhile I realized I probably saved countless lives in the St. Louis area by selling him anything. Geez, you never know. Must be part of the job to be a little nutz to work there. __________________ "Some people can not live without wilderness"-Aldo Leopold

06-09-2004, 04:03 PM	#5
Big Dog Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Tallahassee, Florida Posts: 10,412	Our State Court building here in Tallahassee has the guard post and metal detector just inside the main entrance - the only entry point for the general public. I've never felt a problem with it. Armed security is there for a purpose. Out in town, it's a different matter. Gotta provide our own security! __________________ Moderator of: AR15/M16, M14/M1A, New/Beginning Shooters and Militaria/Collectables.

06-09-2004, 04:17 PM	#6
Shaun Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 8,619 Images: 1	TN's requirement is no government buildings. BUt I have to agree we the tax payers own those buildings and should be able to access them without being disarmed. __________________ "Homeland Security is the responsibility of an armed citizen" ME http://webpages.charter.net/s.s.v/

06-09-2004, 04:40 PM	#7
ScottD Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Evanston, IL Posts: 1,020	The key word to my above post that was missing is the word NOT. Sorry __________________ "Some people can not live without wilderness"-Aldo Leopold

06-09-2004, 04:51 PM	#8
dhermesc Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: East Central Kansas Posts: 1,762	Welcome aboard Signa - excellent first post! Wish the guy (William Strong) who SUCCESSFULLY argued this case would handle a few other cases. __________________ Liberty is for those that claim it.

06-09-2004, 05:54 PM	#9
BattleRifleG3 Super Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Western PA Posts: 11,454 Images: 13	Glad to live in PA __________________ Trust is earned, not... GIVEN away. - Worf