Senior Judge Paul Millin has dismissed a lawsuit filed against Warren County Sheriff Ken Klakamp that dealt with the reference requirement for a concealed carry permit.

Filed by Heather L. and Robert L. Maher, a hearing was held Tuesday morning for Klakamp’s counsel, Tim Bevevino, to raise preliminary objections to the Mahers’ third amended complaint.

Bevevino said that the plaintiffs’ amended complaint is similar to the previous complaints with the “language kind of rejiggered.”

He raised several specific objections, one of which sought to shoot down the Mahers’ request for $100 per day per plaintiff in punitive damages.

He then asked Millin that the complaint be dismissed.

“The Mahers say they have no problem with the form,” Bevevino said, claiming that they do have a problem with the form and its requirement of references. He pointed out that, by statute, the form comes from the Pennsylvania State Police and the county sheriffs are required to conduct an investigation into the character and integrity of the applicants.

“References are that investigation,” he said.

He acknowledged that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does provide the right to bear arms but that case law “says nothing about a fundamental right to carry a concealed weapon,” and instead “leaves open the door for these reasonable regulations.”

Millin acknowledged that the form does come from the state police, but said that it doesn’t say anything about the sheriff ensuring that all of the blanks are filled out on the document. “It seems to me that the argument maybe should be about whether the sheriff has an absolute right” to references.

Bevevino argued that forms typically don’t include a statement that indicates that all blanks need to be filled in. He questioned that if some parts of the form don’t need to be filled out the other parts don’t as well.

“Where does it stop?” he asked.

“They’ve said the reference requirement is unconstitutional,” Bevevino said. Millin questioned whether the references were imposed by the sheriff and Bevevino said that “he is using his discretion to say that the form needs (to be) filled out.”

“And he’s saying if you didn’t list the references, he can’t do this job,” Millin asked.

“That’s correct,” Bevevino said.

Robert Maher said that the form does not explicitly state that references are required.

Millin explained that the statute leaves the sheriff with a “duty to investigate” to ensure people with concealed weapons permits “won’t act in a manner dangerous to public safety.” He asked Maher whether the sheriff having information from people that know him was relevant.

Maher said that he has a constitutional right to bear arms. When Millin asked if they were talking about the same thing, Maher said that if one can’t carry a concealed weapon then they are stripped of their right to bear arms.

Millin said that the Supreme Court has said nothing about the right to carry a concealed weapon and the “fact that there is a provision to license and a procedure to go through” means that such applications can be denied.

“I’d like to get to the crux of the matter,” Millin said. “If you want to challenge the validity of that act which establishes the requirement of a license (there is a) more direct and effective way of doing it. This is not an effective way to do it.” He suggested they submit an application with references included.

“The sheriff hasn’t denied you that right,” Millin said.

Maher indicated that he did not want to challenge the constitutional issue. He said he questioned the integrity of the sheriff’s office and didn’t want the sheriff’s office to know who their friends are. He said he would apply with references included.

Millin reminded him that if the application was denied he could still appeal to the court.

“I’m going to dismiss this complaint with the understanding the sheriff will accept and consider a proper application,” Millin said. “He’s never said that he wouldn’t.”