More in Philly
Judge to Mayor: Knock that shit off.
If they enforce the illegal laws anyway, remember TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
April 17th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
I wonder if they will just “act like this conversation with the judge didn’t take place”.
April 17th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Question (probably rhetorical):
How do cities and other municipalities, as well as Universities, malls, etc., get away with their respective gun restrictions (and banning) with a provision like Title 18 in place?
Couldn’t the family members of the victims of the mall or school shootings file suit under Title 18 – against the various entities that have imposed the restrictions against carrying on their premises?
Obviously not in the case of private property, but most Universities are public property, aren’t they?
Just curious as to how all of this ties together… (or is it all just one big granny knot?)
April 17th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
OK, nevermind… I think I just answered my own question. These are not Law Enforcement agencies, so they wouldn’t be covered under Title 18, right?
But then what about government agencies that ban their employees from even having a weapon in their vehicles?
April 17th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
universities and malls are private property.
the other reason is that the right to arms has, from a legal perspective, never been solidified as a right so protected.
April 17th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
As unc has pointed out it is too early to indict them under title 18, usc 242 because they haven’t yet victimized anybody under the new ordinances. However, the mayor and the councilmen voting in favor of those laws are indictable under at least two felony counts. Conspiracy to commit a crime and then the actual commission of that crime. Could be four felony counts for an ambitious prosecutor, two each for the above in commission of illegal preemption, and two more each for attempted denial of civil rights of citizens.
I don’t expect to see it happen, but they are right now indictable. Where is the pressure for the arrest warrants? If the local bench won’t issue them, where is the pressure on Harrisburg as regards Rendell and the AG?
We can pretty much assume they won’t do anything either, but what wonderful ammunition to use in the next election. “They’re soft on crime, why, they won’t even arrest criminals who have publicly stated they broke the law. Is it cronyism or collusion in the protection of those criminals? Either way they are not fit to hold public office.”
Now, isn’t that a nice soundbite?
April 17th, 2008 at 6:15 pm
No as to private universities, sort-of as to public ones. States can own property like anyone else, so as a general rule, they can do with their property as they want. Of course, if a state passes a law requiring private or state universities to allow carry on campus, and they still don’t, then that’s another matter entirely.
April 17th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Mayor Nutter may actually have to address the issue of crime, instead of harassing law-abiding gun owners in an effort to pretend that he is doing something about crime, though I doubt it. He’ll just blame it on the NRA. Crime is usually about criminals, though in the strange case of Mayor Nutter, it might be more about his constituents. Philadelphia needs adult supervision.
April 17th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
“Philadelphia needs adult supervision.”
Where there is a high level of gun restriction, so too will you find high levels of overall corruption. That’s my axiom. We need some State-level investigators (or federal) in there to root it out before it metastasizes much further.
April 17th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Disagree on the appropriate law. Title 18 Section 2383 would be a better fit.
See http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00002383—-000-.html
Ten years for rebellion.
April 17th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
I prefer the max. penalty that sec. 242 provides for though.