Recent comments in /f/Pennsylvania

hippata2023 t1_jaagmpp wrote

> “The policy is applicable to all County issued devices, including desktops, laptops, servers, tablets, cellular phones, or any other information processing asset— including any and all devices connected to the County of Lancaster network for the purpose of accessing County of Lancaster data or services.”

You're reading that too broadly. So long as the device itself doesn't connect to the County's network, it's not subject to this rule. So yes, you can still check email on your personal device and not worry about running afoul of this policy, so long as it's not connected to the network.

2

MaybeADumbass t1_jaafzac wrote

I'm honestly not sure. I think it's automatically illegal to possess a gun by PA law if you are a prohibited person by federal law or something like that but I am not a lawyer. I know that if you fail a background check the prosecution is done locally under PA law so it would make sense.

I would assume then that being caught with weed and a firearm in PA could be prosecuted even with a MMJ card, since you're a prohibited person by federal law. Supposedly just having a valid MMJ card (from any state) is evidence that someone is a user, so likewise I think being caught with just an MMJ card and a firearm (e.g. in a traffic stop or a visit to your house for something unrelated) could be prosecuted.

I don't know how likely that would be, but If I had an MMJ card, I would absolutely keep it 100% separate from anything firearm-related all the time. That's not a risk I would take but I'd guess most people would be OK for years.

What I would truly worry about is if the PSP were given access to the database again.

They already have access to the database(s) of people with a License to Carry Firearms . If they had access to the database(s) of MMJ card holders, it would be a pretty simple task to compare the names on one to the names on the other and see who lands on both. Anyone with an MMJ card older than their LCTF has automatically committed a felony and they have their signature on the proof. They can be prosecuted with just a little bit of paperwork. Everyone else could have their LCTF immediately revoked at least since they're known to be prohibited.

I'm not sure what they are allowed to do with the record of handgun transfers, you'd have to ask a lawyer. It wouldn't be hard to match people up, but I don't know whether they could prosecute you if you had an MMJ card when you did a transfer, but it's also a felony since you lied on the form and that would technically be proof. I think they could more easily prosecute anyone going forward. It probably wouldn't be difficult to link the MMJ database(s) to the PICS check and fail you when you try to buy a gun. If they didn't do that they could still easily cross-reference afterward and prosecute you just as easily.

I don't recommend owning firearms and holding an MMJ card at the same time, but if someone decided to do it, I'd suggest not buying any handguns or new long guns and absolutely not applying for (or renewing!) a License to Carry Firearms as long as you hold it.

1

HairyHouse2 t1_jaafhfd wrote

Lamb supported Trump's wall. And the first bill he signed off on was one his (bank lobbyist) father was lobbying on.

When you do a little bit of research, it's obvious lamb is a scumbag and we can do better

Edit: I can already tell that were going to end up talking about something other than Lambs indefensible votes, if there is even a reply. Glad we can just downvote people for daring to criticize corporate trash

9

tonytroz t1_jaaeyvc wrote

>If he was being pushed to run just to secure a seat and not because of any personal ambition or sense of service, wouldn’t he have already retired and allowed the governor to choose a replacement?

No that would be an absolute disaster. The governor doesn't choose a replacement for the next 6 years. They just select a replacement until a special election this November. It would give the GOP a do-over with a better candidate against what would likely be Lamb who already lost the primary.

With Sinema leaving the Democratic party that means the Democrats could theoretically lose control of the Senate (should Sinema change who she caucuses with) in a year that wouldn't normally be possible. That would be mayhem for Biden's reelection campaign and absolute chaos if a liberal Supreme Court Justice died or retired next year.

2

tinymonesters t1_jaaeugf wrote

Most likely it's the worker. I can choose if the information is sufficient for review personally. And I do when it's a vague statement like: "(Insert name here) is under my care for (whatever diagnosis)" nope not spending tax money to get a guaranteed denial.

Edit: I have actually literally Never gotten a "denial" it's "I need more information".

1

Routine-Arrival3567 t1_jaab6sv wrote

When a person determined their identity from their political ideology, then any political disagreement becomes an attack on the person. This is why the population is currently artificially polarized and why compromise is impossible, to do so is the same as agreeing entirely with everything the person believes. The world has experienced many episodes in history where such polarization has occurred, it never ended well, which is why I'm hoping to see a return to rational realism and a shift away from ideological idealism based on arguments propped up by emotional premises that are supported by demonizing objective facts. I still have faith, mostly because I have children who are being taught valid logic and critical thinking are paramount and supreme to all arguments that fight to remove such nuances to so many arguments being thrust upon them outside of our four walls.

2