Amish Man Challenges Gun Purchase Photo ID Requirement

amish random guy

[Would they both accept this random sketch?]

BearingArms: Here’s an interesting First Amendment case with Second Amendment ramifications:

An Amish resident of central Pennsylvania is challenging the photo identification requirement to purchase a firearm, saying his religious beliefs prevent him from being photographed.

PennLive.com reports that Andrew Hertzler argues in a suit filed Friday in U.S. Middle District Court that the requirement violates his religious freedom and his constitutional right to possess a firearm.

Hertzler said his beliefs as a member of an Amish community in Lancaster County bar photographs being taken of him, but he was prohibited from buying a gun in June for self-defense purposes.

The lawsuit said Hertzler could get a federal firearms license to deal in guns without a photograph but has no desire to do that. He contends that the state’s non-photo ID along with other documentation should be sufficient.  more here

 

16 Comments on Amish Man Challenges Gun Purchase Photo ID Requirement

  1. “Rights” flow from God.

    That’s why they’re “rights.”

    Self defense is as innate as breathing.

    Not just a “right” but a duty and an obligation.

  2. You would think the Amish, who traditionally eschew modern technology, would only want to possess a vintage firearm, such as a black powder muzzleloader. Since those aren’t subject to Federal firearms regulations, no problemo.

    🙂

  3. he should go to the drug dealer or gang member down the street and see where he got his gun if he really wants one.

    funny how criminals don’t have any problem being allowed a gun but law abiding citizens do.

  4. Actually, he should lose.

    The state has an interest in protecting its residents. This is why a driver license has a photograph. Remember that a driver license is not a certificate of competency; it is there merely to enforce the varied police regulations (Wysock v Borcher Brothers). That would be similar with this ID. If a state determines that the safety of the public is best served by having a photo ID, for whatever reason, the courts will almost always uphold that.

    However, if he does lose (and I think he will), this means that NO religious grounds can be used in the taking of a photo for state ID purposes. In other words, the muzloid women will have to uncover to take the ID photo.

    Every cloud has a silver lining.

  5. Back in `74 I turned in my plastic Texas driver’s license that had a photo and got a Wisconsin license.

    It was paper and had no photo.

    Seemed odd and vulnerable to fraud – like an under aged kid getting into a bar using an older sibling/friend’s license.

    Not that I would have any personal knowledge of that happening. (cough)

  6. Actually, this is a good example of why universal registration should never happen.

    He could buy from a private citizen without that photo. Unless PA has gone all Nazi like NY on this subject.

Comments are closed.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!