The NRA is suing my city

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame
NRA sues Pennsylvania cities over gun restrictions

The National Rifle Association is taking on three Pennsylvania cities over gun restrictions that the NRA says violate a state law on the books for decades.

Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Lancaster all have laws that regulate gun ownership in some way, including requirements that owners report lost or stolen firearms, prohibitions on guns in city-owned facilities and restrictions on gun possession by anyone subject to a protective order.

Pittsburgh law prohibits gun owners from carrying firearms in a vehicle, and bans firing any guns except at licensed target ranges.

Those laws are preempted by a 1974 state law that bars cities from setting their own gun policy. But state courts have thrown out previous lawsuits because of a requirement that plaintiffs show harm done by existing city laws.

That is, until the Republican state legislature stepped in: Last year, legislators passed a new law allowing any Pennsylvania gun owner, or a group with members in Pennsylvania — like the NRA — to challenge local ordinances. If the challenge is successful, the losing cities would be on the hook for the plaintiff’s legal costs.

Nearly two dozen Pennsylvania towns and cities repealed their gun ordinances after Gov. Tom Corbett (R) signed the bill into law. But Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Lancaster did not.

“The cities of Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Lancaster have openly defied state law for decades. They continue to willfully violate the law and insist on politically grandstanding at taxpayers’ expense,” Chris Cox, the NRA’s top lobbyist, said in a statement announcing the lawsuits.

But the legality of the new law, Act 192, is being challenged. Lawyers for all three cities say the law violated Pennsylvania’s single-subject rule, and that giving standing to groups like the NRA is unconstitutional in and of itself. Any lawsuit over the city ordinances will likely require higher courts to rule on the Act before going to trial.

“We will not be deterred and we will keep our lawsuit going against the unconstitutional act passed in Harrisburg,” Pittsburgh Mayor William Peduto told reporters on Wednesday. “It is unconstitutional, it never should have been passed, and it breaks with more than 200 years of history in Pennsylvania, by allowing organizations without standing the ability to sue.”

:Grizzly:

I think the local laws make sense (at least the one I know about in my city) but if they are truly violating a state law then they should try to do things that are in accordance with all the laws. However, it seems absurd to me that organizations like the NRA or some other person that isn't affected by the local laws at all should be able to sue. I'm glad my city isn't backing down and I hope the NRA loses this battle.


:Grizzly:
 

Crowns&Laurels

BANNED
Banned
Pennsylvania is the strictest state in the country overall, with Virginia coming in second.

And that's just un-American despite their historical significances, and they should be scrutinized for it :)
 

Nick M

Plymouth Colonist
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Prohibiting a citizen from carrying an Uzi in his car is a violation of the 2nd amendment. He has the right to keep and bear arms. The vast majority of gun control laws increase crime and are illegal and immoral. But since we have a Republican Supreme Court, it will not change.
 

Crowns&Laurels

BANNED
Banned
Prohibiting a citizen from carrying an Uzi in his car is a violation of the 2nd amendment. He has the right to keep and bear arms. The vast majority of gun control laws increase crime and are illegal and immoral. But since we have a Republican Supreme Court, it will not change.

I read that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is the REAL Supreme Court, and the one we know is just a figurehead.

I also read that in a questionable book though, so it's not something I've marked as either true or not.
Would explain the strictness of Penn though. They apparently didn't fall too far from Britain's tree, and they do have mean ties to the UN.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
NRA sues Pennsylvania cities over gun restrictions



:Grizzly:

I think the local laws make sense (at least the one I know about in my city) but if they are truly violating a state law then they should try to do things that are in accordance with all the laws. However, it seems absurd to me that organizations like the NRA or some other person that isn't affected by the local laws at all should be able to sue. I'm glad my city isn't backing down and I hope the NRA loses this battle.


:Grizzly:

How does this make sense to you:

Pittsburgh law prohibits gun owners from carrying firearms in a vehicle, and bans firing any guns except at licensed target ranges.

A couple problems:

1) How would someone get ones weapon to the gun range unless they lived in walking distance?

2) How would one defend themselves against a criminal in this case making an attempt on their life, if that attempt was made outside of a gun range?

So how do those make any sense?
 

resodko

BANNED
Banned
How does this make sense to you:

Pittsburgh law prohibits gun owners from carrying firearms in a vehicle, and bans firing any guns except at licensed target ranges.

A couple problems:

1) How would someone get ones weapon to the gun range unless they lived in walking distance?


strap it to the roof :duh:
 

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame
I read that the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is the REAL Supreme Court, and the one we know is just a figurehead.

I also read that in a questionable book though, so it's not something I've marked as either true or not.
Would explain the strictness of Penn though. They apparently didn't fall too far from Britain's tree, and they do have mean ties to the UN.

What? So the PA Supreme Court controls the US Supreme Court? :AMR:
 

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame
How does this make sense to you:

Pittsburgh law prohibits gun owners from carrying firearms in a vehicle, and bans firing any guns except at licensed target ranges.

A couple problems:

1) How would someone get ones weapon to the gun range unless they lived in walking distance?

2) How would one defend themselves against a criminal in this case making an attempt on their life, if that attempt was made outside of a gun range?

So how do those make any sense?

:idunno:

I'm trying to look up more info about that law....
 

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame
Prohibiting a citizen from carrying an Uzi in his car is a violation of the 2nd amendment. He has the right to keep and bear arms. The vast majority of gun control laws increase crime and are illegal and immoral. But since we have a Republican Supreme Court, it will not change.

One of the laws in question is a requirement to report stolen guns. That doesn't seem to violate the right to keep and bear arms.
 

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame
Pennsylvania’s Shameful NRA Sellout - Eleanor Clift , The Daily Beast


Two days after losing his reelection bid, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett signed a bill with an amendment that allows the National Rifle Association (NRA) to sue cities and towns that pass ordinances regulating firearms by claiming they infringe upon individual rights. Until the gun lobby’s dream amendment got tacked on in the final hours of the legislative session, Act 192 had nothing to do with guns; it criminalizes the theft of secondary metal, like copper wire, and it had broad support.

With Democrat Tom Wolf replacing the Republican Corbett, the NRA and its allies in the legislature had to act quickly. In his haste, Corbett even signed the wrong version of the bill, and had to be called back for a second signing. Outraged at how gun enthusiasts rammed through the amendment, Democratic State Senator Daylin Leach recruited several other elected officials plus the cities of Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Lancaster to challenge the law’s constitutionality.

Pennsylvania law says amendments must be germane, and empowering the NRA to sue municipalities for enacting gun laws is far afield from Act 192’s intent. Leach, a lawyer, wrote the brief himself, and the lawsuit is before the Commonwealth Court. “The Pennsylvania legislature is essentially a wholly owned subsidiary of the NRA,” he says, explaining that the NRA saw an opening in the closing days of Corbett’s term to “sneak it in” while it had the votes and a proven ally in the governor’s office.

The NRA quickly used its newfound legal power, suing a number of municipalities and threatening others to get them to back down. The amendment as written says an organization does not need what’s known as “standing”—in other words, the NRA doesn’t have to prove someone has been harmed by a gun safety law. It can just outright sue, and if it wins, the city or town has to pay the group’s legal expenses. But there’s no risk to the NRA; if it loses, it doesn’t pay the winning side’s legal expenses.

Ed Foley, the mayor of Jenkintown, a borough in the Philadelphia suburbs, told the Daily Beast that the NRA forced him “to choose between public safety and financial solvency.” Foley describes Jenkintown on his Twitter account as “0.6 square miles of the best place to live, dine, shop, and raise a family.” With a population of 4,500 and a budget of $6.5 million, “We can’t afford to defend a law suit even if we win it, and if we lose, we have to pay their legal fees. That’s a form of blackmail,” he says, “or maybe extortion is a better word.”

Under the threat of a lawsuit brought by the NRA, an ordinance in place since 2010 requiring Jenkintown residents to report lost or stolen firearms at the police station was rescinded in a public meeting. “It was a hold-your-nose vote,” says Foley. “It’s such an innocuous law, and it doesn’t do anything to restrict anybody’s right to have a gun. I don’t know why the NRA isn’t a bigger supporter of the police. The police want the law.”
.....


I donated to support the fight against the NRA. :box:
 

kmoney

New member
Hall of Fame
I don't really see the infringement with a law that requires someone to report a lost/stolen gun. But either way, I already said that if the laws are actually in violation of state law then they should be overturned and that my primary criticism here and my donation is a protest against the NRA being able to come in and sue these cities.
 

TIPlatypus

New member
I have an idea. Change the second amendment. Make carrying guns freely and without a licence illegal. Then less people will get shot. Here in Britain they get stabbed instead.
 
Top