Pittsburgh to consider illegal gun law on Tuesday 18 NOV 08

[Task Force 16]

imported post

jahwarrior72 wrote:

Task Force 16 wrote:

I'm curious. Could some one explain how this legislation infringes on LAC right to keep and bear arms? I'm just asking, since I don't have a dog in this hunt.

It seems to me that if a person that legally owns legal firearms and they are stolen, they would want to report it to LE ASAP in hopes of getting them back and to prevent suspicion being cast on themselves in the event the weapons are used in the commission of a crime later.

Criminals are usually the ones that don't report when their illegal poperty is stolen. Yeah, there are those rareidiot exceptions that will call the cops and report they were robbed of their illegal drugs.

The idea that this law would curb straw purchases may sound logical, but I don't think it will do that much to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

As for Councilwoman Payne's remark about the Constitution, she needs to be voted out of office for that alone.

look at it this way: i go on vacation for a3 weeks. the day after i leave, someone breaks into my home, and steals my guns. i don't find out about it until 3 weeks later, when i return. the man who stole my guns is caught 2 weeks after the fact, with my guns. when i return, i'll come home to find out i committed a felony, or multiple felonies, because i didn't report my guns as being stolen.

That could happen, for sure, unless the ordinance is worded in such a way that the report has to be made within 24 hrs of having knowledge of the theft. Otherwise all this law does is create additional hinderance to legal gun owners. Which may be the purpose to begin with. I don't see it doingmuch to stop guns from getting into the hands of criminals.

 

[joe15003]

imported post

Kevin miller on kdka radio is talking about this.

http://www.kdkaradio.com/pages/59315.php

 

[cato2]

imported post

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=1731191&postcount=31


Pending LTE...

I was stunned to read that the Pittsburgh City Council had voted 6-1, with two abstentions, to pass a bill that required any owner of a firearm that is lost or stolen to report said firearm within 24 hours. A fine of $500 is possible for violating the law.

It is my understanding from what I read, the Pennsylvania State Constitution reserves the right to make laws concerning firearms to the state and not local governments. It is also my understanding Council members take an oath to uphold this same state constitution.

Obviously, Tonya Payne has no regard for your state Constitution after uttering this statement: "Who really cares about it being unconstitutional." She, along with the other five council members, have clearly violated their oath to uphold the Pennsylvania State Constitution with their vote. They should be immediately removed from office and criminally charged. Tonya Payne, based on her statement alone, should never be permitted to hold public office again.

Their decision to vote for this bill will cost the hard working taxpayers of Pittsburgh tens of thousands, if not more, when the city council is taken to court for violating state law. There is no question the city will be sued, it is just a matter of when. Other localities, as mentioned in the article, have been when they too, decided to take the law into their own hands.

San Francisco, in my state, illegally passed a firearm law that cost their taxpayers millions of dollars in the ensuing law suit. They tried to usurp the state law and even though their mayor knew they would lose the court case that would follow, as they did ten years earlier for another firearm law, he was willing to go to court and spend the taxpayers' money. The result: The California Supreme Court overruled the city law, stating it violated the California Constitution.

Your city faces the same result and you have only your city council people to blame.

As far as the two members who abstained from voting on the bill, they showed by that decision they did not have the fortitude to do what was right and legal; voting no. They should be shown no more respect than those who voted for it.

 

[Samuel Adams]

imported post

"Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?" said Councilwoman Tonya Payne, a supporter.

Here is my response posted Councilcritter Payne on the city website.

I am writing in response to Ms. Payne's comment in the Post Gazette about council passing the unconstitutional ordinance requiring gun owners to report a stolen weapon withing 24 hours. I am a proud military Veteran, having sworn an oath to the US Constitution in the Pittsburgh Federal Building. Ms. Payne's comment"Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?" is an outrage to those of us who have fought, some dying, to protect our system of government and our rights. The US Constitution, in its Original Intent, is an all or nothing deal. I ask Ms. Payne - How would she like it if we disregarded the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 19th Amendments?

 

[Farmer Troy]

imported post

Correct me if I am wrong here, but I believe her statement is referring to the Pennsylvania Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution.

Still, I agree with the basis of your statement though. I am a vet also.

 

[Samuel Adams]

imported post

Farmer Troy wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong here, but I believe her statement is referring to the Pennsylvania Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution.

Still, I agree with the basis of your statement though. I am a vet also.

Either way, Article VI of the US Constitution states that it is the "supreme law of the land".

Thanks for your service.

 

[Thundar]

imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:

I'm curious. Could some one explain how this legislation infringes on LAC right to keep and bear arms? I'm just asking, since I don't have a dog in this hunt.

It seems to me that if a person that legally owns legal firearms and they are stolen, they would want to report it to LE ASAP in hopes of getting them back and to prevent suspicion being cast on themselves in the event the weapons are used in the commission of a crime later.

Criminals are usually the ones that don't report when their illegal poperty is stolen. Yeah, there are those rareidiot exceptions that will call the cops and report they were robbed of their illegal drugs.

The idea that this law would curb straw purchases may sound logical, but I don't think it will do that much to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

As for Councilwoman Payne's remark about the Constitution, she needs to be voted out of office for that alone.

The requirement to report a stolen firearm is a big stepping stone in mandatory gun registration laws.

There are also liability issues to consider for those firearms that were not obtained through FFLs and thus do not have traceability.

 

[Task Force 16]

imported post

Thundar wrote:

Task Force 16 wrote:

I'm curious. Could some one explain how this legislation infringes on LAC right to keep and bear arms? I'm just asking, since I don't have a dog in this hunt.

It seems to me that if a person that legally owns legal firearms and they are stolen, they would want to report it to LE ASAP in hopes of getting them back and to prevent suspicion being cast on themselves in the event the weapons are used in the commission of a crime later.

Criminals are usually the ones that don't report when their illegal poperty is stolen. Yeah, there are those rareidiot exceptions that will call the cops and report they were robbed of their illegal drugs.

The idea that this law would curb straw purchases may sound logical, but I don't think it will do that much to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

As for Councilwoman Payne's remark about the Constitution, she needs to be voted out of office for that alone.

The requirement to report a stolen firearm is a big stepping stone in mandatory gun registration laws.

There are also liability issues to consider for those firearms that were not obtained through FFLs and thus do not have traceability.

yeah, I can seethat being led up to. Seems that the best thing they could do to fight violent crime is allow all citizens to own and carry guns, making violent criminal activty a really hazardous carrer choice.

 

[Farmer Troy]

imported post

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_603101.html

Straw purchaser gun-control law to go into effect By Mike Wereschagin
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Tuesday, December 16, 2008

A controversial gun-control law passed by Pittsburgh City Council will take effect within 10 days without Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's signature.
Whether it will be enforced remains to be seen.
The law, which many believe violates the state Constitution, requires gun owners to report a lost or stolen gun within 24 hours of noticing it's gone. The measure is designed to stop the flow of guns into the streets through straw purchasers -- people with clean records who buy guns to sell to criminals.

In a letter to council, Ravenstahl said the city's Home Rule Charter, as well as the state Uniform Firearms Act, "preclude enforcement of this ordinance." A similar law in Philadelphia was struck down by Commonwealth Court, a decision that was appealed to the state Supreme Court.
The law might violate a 1995 agreement between the city and gun rights advocates, in which the city agreed to leave gun-control laws to the state, Ravenstahl said.
City Council passed the law Dec. 2 in a 6-1 vote, making a veto "futile," Ravenstahl said Monday.
"It's a shame that we have a City Council that doesn't know its job or its place in the enactment of law," said Kim Stolfer, chairman of Firearm Owners Against Crime, which opposes the law. Stolfer said a more effective anti-crime initiative would have been to dedicate more resources to enforcing existing laws.
"They lost an opportunity to do something worthwhile in going after criminals," Stolfer said.
City Councilman Bill Peduto said he thinks the law has "a chance" of standing up to legal challenge.

"If we can start to eliminate the loopholes that allow criminals to run an illegal gun trade in Pennsylvania and the city of Pittsburgh, it's worth the challenge," Peduto said.
Meghan Jones-Rolla, a lawyer with the Downtown firm of Meyer Darragh Buckler Bebenek & Eck who specializes in firearms law, said "it's pretty clear" the law is unenforceable.
"They're acting against their own home rule charter and against the Constitution of Pennsylvania," Jones-Rolla said.
Ravenstahl said he supports the law's intent and "will continue to lobby our friends and representatives in the state government to enact meaningful statewide regulations that would require the reporting of a lost of stolen firearm."
"Certainly, I appreciate council's fervor and creativity in attempting to craft legislation" that would pass Constitutional muster, Ravenstahl said. "However, I cannot agree that our ordinance, as written, would be enforceable."

Mike Wereschagin can be reached at mwereschagin@tribweb.com or 412-320-7900.


[In accord with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this article or photograph is
distributed without profit to those who have an interest in receiving
such material for educational purposes. Any other use requires
contacting the author.]