Court Opinion

ID: 9641608
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 17:36:07.152724+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:38.709180
License: Public Domain

SPAETH, Judge,
dissenting:
The statute forbids one to “carry a firearm.” The majority acknowledges that this means an operable firearm. Of course we must read the record in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, but that doesn’t mean we read it to say what it doesn’t say.
The expert said the firearm was inoperable. (N.T. 40). He then said he could render it operable by using pliers. (N.T. 35-36) (At one point he expressed the opinion that hand pressure would be sufficient, but he admitted he had not tried to fire the firearm using only hand pressure. (N.T. 43-45)) He also said that “someone who knows very little about guns” might not recognize that the firearm could be made operable by applying pressure to the barrel pin. (N.T. 40-41)
If you can make the firearm you are carrying fire only after squeezing it with pliers — assuming you know what is wrong with the firearm and know how to use pliers to fix it — the firearm is inoperable — unless perchance you are carrying not only the firearm but also the pliers, which the evidence here does not show.
The lower court was correct in granting the motion to arrest, and its order should be affirmed.