We win, they lose. Now, let’s get to work
Attorneys with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence today are asking the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, PA to throw out the lawsuit by the National Rifle Association against the City of Pittsburgh or they’ll hold their breath until they turn blue.
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:45 am
Looks like I need to submit a FOIA, regarding how many state-owned guns aren’t accounted for (police, baliffs, corrections, state guard). I’d wager both that there are a handful known to be missing, and a barrelful that they don’t even know are lost/stolen.
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Why, that would mean that there is the possibility that those who are most able to get handguns and who most often interact with a criminal element in their daily jobs might, just might, maybe, be corruptible to the point that they are a source of guns used in crimes….
This idea that corrupt Philly government employees with access to guns might be passing them to criminals is an interesting possibility, following the disclosure that some 60% to 90% of Mexican drug cartel guns seized by the government there are found to originate with either illegal shipments from overseas (possible with corrupt customs officials) and from the Mexican police and military (who apparently lose their guns quite often).
June 2nd, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Did y’all notice the constant reference to “gun trafficking”? As if all gun owners are sleazy crooks. (like the Bradys)
The reason the NRA is fighting that ordinance, and why the Bradys like it, is because it criminalizes honest gun owners who’ve had the misfortune of having a gun lost or stolen.
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:34 pm
No mention of the fact in their press release that the ordinance is in violation of Pennsylvania state preemption statutes. Funny how they managed to miss that little tidbit which is the whole crux of the NRA’s (correct) argument.
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Yep, the law is illegal. And the pgh council knew it when they passed it.
Wonder if Brady’s collective heads would explode if someone told them how many concealed weapon permits the sheriff’s office issues (hint: most in the state if I recall correctly).
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Yep, the law is illegal. And the pgh council knew it when they passed it.
—————————————————-
I remember that. And was’nt there a city councilwoman who remarked “who cares if it’s unconstitutional”? What was that commie’s name?
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:31 pm
From the Brady site:
Of course this is useless unless and until private citizens are required to notify gov’t when they make a private sale/purchase as well. Because an alleged trafficker who is approached with crime-scene guns would simply change his story from:
“I lost it. When/where? I don’t remember. What, is that a crime?”
to
“I sold it. To who? I don’t remember. What, is that a crime?”
and this was pathetic:
as if law-abiding gun owners need a law mandating reporting, and criminalizing lack thereof, for their own benefit.
I wonder if the Brady types realize how transparent their bad-faith arguments and dishonesty are.
June 2nd, 2009 at 7:38 pm
Huck : “Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?” said Councilwoman Tonya Payne. “This is what’s right to do, and if this means that we have to go out and have a court battle, then that’s fine…”
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08330/930486-52.stm
June 2nd, 2009 at 10:20 pm
Thanks Dano.
I wonder if this court battle, and the backlash it’s going to cause, is fine by Payne? I hope it causes her to lose her job.
June 3rd, 2009 at 6:21 pm
The reason for this crap is more involved than merely criminalizing people who lose firearms.
It’s about laying the groundwork to criminalize private firearms transfers. In jurisdictions where private sales are unlawful, defending lawyers have demanded the prosecution prove the firearm was not lost or stolen. Criminalizing firearm loss will be used to block this defense.