Posted on 03/07/2015 11:56:48 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
Many municipal governments in Pennsylvania have abandoned their sensible gun laws because public officials believe they cannot afford to defend them against lawsuits.
A court ruling last week in Dauphin County, however, demonstrates why it’s worth the cost of standing up to craven state legislators who have bowed to the National Rifle Association.
After state courts repeatedly upheld local ordinances from across the state that were designed to enhance public safety without diminishing legitimate gun rights, the gun lobby put a full- court press on legislators, many of whom dutifully rolled over for their masters.
In most of the local court cases, no one with legitimate legal standing had sued to overturn them because residents of the towns had no problem with their streets being safer. The NRA and other absolutists tried to sue but the courts found repeatedly that they lacked standing.
So, rootin’-tootin’ gun-lovin’ lawmakers passed a law giving that legal standing to the NRA and other pro-gun groups. The lawmakers legislated against local interests on behalf of interests that often are located in other states. Those interests regularly sue now against local ordinances, arguing that only the state can pass laws relative to guns.
Some Pennsylvania cities decided to stand up to the cowardly legislators and the wealthy gun lobby, even as others simply abandoned their own ordinances.
Last week, Dauphin County Judge Andrew Dowling issued a ruling in a case involving Harrisburg ordinances that demonstrated why the fight for safer streets is worth waging.
The judge overturned three of five Harrisburg ordinances relative to guns because they conflicted with state law. But he upheld two of the most important local ordinances because the state does not have laws in the areas those ordinances address.
One ordinance proscribes the discharge of guns in public parks and other public areas (yes, a pro-gun group sued against that). The other requires gun owners to report to police the loss or theft of a gun, which police consider a key measure against illegal gun trafficking.
Of course, state lawmakers are likely to take the ruling as a new signal to roll over for the gun lobby. But Harrisburg officials deserve credit for fighting for safer streets. Other municipal officials statewide should join them.
Fer crying out loud! When are we going to insist on back grounds checks prior to abortions?
Well that’s a constooshunl right!
So is right to bear guns
These guys can spout this horses#!t all they want but the people have spoken numerous times what happens if these weasels stray from the 2nd amendment!!!
Freedom really bothers some of these jerks.
Thought I would see just how much voodoo was in this one.
Ten.
In only eight paragraphs.
sensible gun laws
bowed to the National Rifle Association.
enhance public safety without diminishing legitimate gun rights
legitimate legal standing
streets being safer
absolutists tried to sue
lacked standing
interests that often are located in other states
wealthy gun lobby
fight for safer streets
roll over for the gun lobby
fighting for safer streets
I left out a “legal standing” or two because I am just plain sick of hearing that crap.
Its not surprising that no one would actually put their name on this drivel.
.
I personally thing this news outlet is dangerous to the public. Perhaps a ban or confiscation is the answer.
Idiots like the author need to read a bit of history when guns get confiscated. Especially what happens to the press.
Why are all newspaper editors totalitarian communists? Is it a job requirement?
A major difference being that the later is actually written in the constitution while the former is conjured up from invisible writing in the empty spaces between the written word.
The Pennsylvania constitution says the right to bear arms “shall not be questioned” - even stronger than the US constitution. What part of THAT is confusing??
Whenever I see the word “sensible” applied to dun laws I don’t need to read any further. I know that the following material will be a complete totalitarian police state worshiping piece of garbage, and that the writer is a sniveling cowardly jackbootlicking bed wetter who most likely voted for the current turd in the white hut and thinks that the Democrats represent the people.
You might consider doing so. Collection agencies sometimes go way overboard in how they attempt to collect debts. And they don't always check that they have the right person either.
If you read the article the Judge actually upheld the State laws. Only two points not covered by the law were left alone.
So what the hell was the point of the editorial?
So what the hell was the point of the editorial?
The point is to convince us that all gun laws are good, even when governments have to break the law to have them...
That the rule of law does not matter, when you are a liberal.
That the NRA is the great Satan, and breaking the law and violating the constitution are wonderful things when you are fighting the great satan.
Ah typo - sorry about that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.