Oh you mean the “Gun-Free School Zone Act” which was deemed unconstitutional in the 90’s?

Stop making shit up.

Okay, no, I follow you. If federal employees are exempted from permits then why is there distinction in LEOSA - which you said didn't apply -

• (36 C.F.R. §§ 2.4(e) & (h), 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)) allow for individuals carrying concealed in accordance with the laws of the state in which the federal park or GFSZ is located to carry concealed in them*; however, an individual carrying under LEOSA is carrying under FEDERAL LAW and not in accordance with the laws of the state they are in.

• What this means is that you are NOT exempted from carrying a concealed firearm in these areas UNLESS you are on official duty or possess a valid and qualifying state issued concealed carry permit.

Because if they DON'T have a license, LEOSA which is the authorization to carry by the Federal Government, for federal employees, then they would need a permit to carry in those zones in the states that require Concealed Carry being off duty is not in the employees authorized capacity?

EDIT: PA CSA 18. 912(c) - I'm assuming you're referring to " * or other lawful duty"

if they don't have a pa permit and are not in the scope of their duties, do they have to observe federal law or state. Meaning do they need to carry under federal law with LEOSA because they don't have a permit in the state and are subject to the laws of the state they are in, and are NOT exempted from GFZ with LEOSA?

Be aware that Philadelphia has some crazy laws about knives. It's mostly illegal to carry one within city limits. I spent most of my life with a Swiss Army Knife in my pocket, but that's a crime here, and I'm not relying on Krasner's discretion to avoid trouble.

From the city's Municipal Code:

§ 10-820. Cutting Weapons in Public Places. 269

   (1)   Definition.

      Cutting Weapon. Any knife or other cutting instrument which can be used as a weapon that has a cutting edge similar to that of a knife. No tool or instrument commonly or ordinarily used in a trade, profession or calling shall be considered a cutting weapon while actually being used in the active exercise of that trade, profession or calling.

   (2)   Prohibited Conduct. No person shall use or possess any cutting weapon upon the public streets or upon any public property at any time.

      (a)   Exception: This restriction shall not apply to the use and possession of cutting tools by emergency personnel of the Philadelphia Fire Department, whether on or off duty. 270

   (3)   Penalty. The penalty for violation of this Section shall be a fine of not less than three hundred dollars ($300) and imprisonment of not less than ninety days.

I mean… it’s right there in the name

Don’t they apprehend people?

They detect them, they don't investigate them. It's right there in the name.

I carry bear spray and a taser every time I take my dog for a walk. She’s been attacked twice by off leash dogs with zero recall. Last one nearly killed her and cost the owner quite a bit of money. That dog lost its life cuz of a crap owner that couldn’t control their dog.

6106 exempts her from permit requirements. I pointed you to the section.

Duly authorized federal employees are exempt from permits. Duly authorized doesn’t require her to be on duty. Merely being authorized to carry by her agency is sufficient. Have badge; can carry

[deleted]

The dogs. That's quoted from the article. You asked what that had to do with it. It was from the article, and again, it never mentioned her having a permit.

>not even talking about how illegal having the gun in Philadelphia that is

This you?

Even if she doesn't have a permit?

Anyone can, if they have a permit. Nothing said they did. Never even mentioned it. And what you're referring to was a direct quote from the article...

Good. Fucking people need to control their animals.

Dog people are weird.

Everything you just said is wrong.

First, if it was a service dog it never would have left the owners side. But that doesn't matter because the agent isn't going to say "pardon me, is your dog that's currently mauling my dog a service animal?"

Second, having a gun in Philadelphia is perfectly legal for anyone, all you need is a conceal and carry permit. I'm not sure what other dogs on leash has anything to do with that.

Third, I don't know if you know this, but when a pitbull attacks it's almost impossible to make it stop.

What you should be asking is why was the owner of the pitbull ignoring it's violent behavior. Neighbors of the dog said this wasn't the first attack.

This dog was no angel and had a history of violence

Forbidden drive during the summer owner swim their pups in Wissahickon creak off leash. My dog was attacked by a group of loose dogs and injured. After that I won’t go there without being prepared.

good ol perfect, rich Manheim Twp.

Lmaoooo right? The hunting knife cracked me up, like alright Dwight Schrute

Fairmount park & Forbidden drive.

That or get attacked by some off leash out of control antisocial dog.

That would have been nice to have in the original article. Dogs lunge all the time when walking past other dogs.

Thanks

Just because I think the article might be confusing, when it says that she shot "the other dog", they're not referring to the one of two dogs passing by that didn't attack. She shot the attacking dog, which was a pitbull.

> Roh said surveillance video indicated that Maguire had been sitting on a bench when the pit bull rushed forward and pulled the dog off her lap, causing Maguire to intervene and try to separate the animals before drawing her weapon and shooting the pit bull in its hindquarters at close range.

From The Inquirer.

[deleted]

In other words, you drew a conclusion and formed an opinion without having all the available facts.