Council passes controversial bill on stolen guns

[Mugu]

By Rich Lord, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Pittsburgh City Council gave its first approval today to legislation requiring that anyone report a lost or stolen firearm report that within 24 hours or potentially face a $500 fine.

The 6-1 vote, with two abstentions, sets up a final vote likely next week, which would send the legislation to Mayor Luke Ravenstahl for his signature or veto, and then potentially to the courts, where similar measures have been challenged.

"Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?" said Councilwoman Tonya Payne, a supporter. "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 ... We have plenty of dead bodies coming up in our streets every single day, and that is unacceptable."

The lone no vote was by Councilman Ricky Burgess, who argued that it would be a "false cure" that would be "particularly cruel" to his violence-plagued northeastern Pittsburgh district.

http://www.postgazette.com/pg/08329/930426-100.stm">Complete article

[rasputin5]

1. Why don't they just outlaw stupidity?

Oh, doing that would put themselves in jeopardy...
:grr: :eyes:

[boozepusher]

2. "Who really cares about it being unconstitional?"

Unbelievable.

[jody]

3. RE: "unconstitional?" SCOTUS says the 2nd Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms but

that staunch protector of Civil Rights disagrees and refuses to acknowledge that decision.

ACLU POSITION
Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right. For seven decades, the Supreme Court's 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that view.

The Supreme Court has now ruled otherwise. In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia.

The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment. We do not, however, take a position on gun control itself. In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue.

Given ACLU's stubborn, stupid position it's not surprising that a councilwoman in Pittsburgh doesn't care to much about our Constitution.

[Edweird]

7. Well, the Constitution *is* "just a godamned piece of paper".

Well, to chimpy.....

[machI]

4. I don't have a dog in this hunt when it comes to guns, but supporting the Constitution is important

Allowing abridgment of Constitutional Law sets a precedent that can be extended to other things.

If they can suppress the lawful rights of gun owners, where does that leave people who are fighting for the rights of gay and lesbian people?

[jody]

5. "where does that leave people" from the GLBT community and others? Up the creek without a paddle. nt

[BurningMan]

6. "Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?"

Not the politicians.

So if not the people, no one.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Why would this be 'unconstitutional'?

It's asking the genuine gun owners to keep track of their guns. What's the problem with that? I'd have thought a responsible owner would know where it is, and whether it's been stolen or not. It doesn't stop people owning them.

[michreject]

10. It's unconstitutional because the state makes gun policies

Not cities. They have a pre emption law in Pa.

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. Oh, OK, not 2nd amendment stuff, then

So the idea is fine, it's just being implemented at too low a level. I can accept that.

[michreject]

12. The law would have to be drafted at the state level

and passed there.

[KharmaTrain]

9. Closing Another Loophole

As many have said, the problem aren't that there aren't gun laws, but the ones on the books are porous...some laws were deliberately written weak, others have been rendered that way by "enterprising individuals"...and this is another example. Several years ago I served on a jury in a straw buyer gun case and got a first hand look at how contradictory and conflicting the gun laws were. I also saw many ways guns slipped through the cracks legally that ended up with gangbangers. This is not a qusetion about prohibiting guns but enforcing laws and responsibility.

[RB TexLa]

13. Report to whom? It doesn't say. You never have to report stolen property to the police.

I've been through that with a car that was stolen. They came by my house angry after they got whatever information from my insurance company but there was nothing they could do about it.

[jmg257]

14. I wonder if Councilwoman Tonya Payne had to take an oath when she took office,

one that mentions supporting and defending the constitution? I have no problem with passing a law, but to knowingly admit it is not constitutional - and pass it anyway? THAT is criminal.

Her heart might be in the right place now, but who knows what SHE might be for next time, whether it is legal or not.

:shrug: