Pa. court hears challenge to Philadelphia gun laws
PHILADELPHIA - The Delaware County lawyer representing the National Rifle Association told a state appeals court Wednesday that the city has no authority to implement an assault weapons ban because such a measure deals with constitutional rights.
The NRA is challenging a series of gun control measures that City Council passed in an effort to combat gun violence. Mayor Michael Nutter signed the bills even though the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has previously upheld the state's exclusive right to enact gun laws.
Lawyer C. Scott Shields, who represents the NRA, said the city simply isn't allowed to regulate firearms. Shields, a Republican, also is the elected mayor of Rutledge.
"When you deal with firearms rights, you deal with constitutional rights which have statewide concern," Shields told the Commonwealth Court during arguments Wednesday. "If you're not a prohibited person and you own an AR-15, that's lawful."
After City Council passed the five gun control ordinances in April, a city judge blocked two of them. Common Pleas Judge Jane Cutler Greenspan ruled that it would almost certainly be illegal for the city to implement the two measures, a one-gun-a-month limit and an assault-weapons ban.
But she allowed three other measures to stand. Those laws require gun owners to report lost or stolen guns within 48 hours; allow police to confiscate guns from people who are considered a danger; and prohibit anyone subject to a protection-from-abuse order from possessing a gun.
The NRA is challenging all five ordinances, although attorneys focused on the proposed assault-weapons ban in court Tuesday.
"Most of my clients have machine guns," Shields said. "They are absolutely lawful."
Police already have the authority to seize weapons if they are being used unlawfully, he said.
But a city attorney, Richard Feder, said he believes that state law is unclear over what weapons are banned and what weapons are not banned.
"The NRA presented no evidence that these weapons have any civilized purpose whatsoever in our society," Feder said.
The city ordinances, he said, also would impose only "minimal, incidental imposition" on the rights of lawful gun purchasers.
A 1974 state law says that only the General Assembly can regulate guns, but the Philadelphia case is being watched by other cities in the state. Allentown and Pottsville have passed measures requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen guns. Other cities, including Pittsburgh and Lancaster, have considered similar legislation.
In September, the Commonwealth Court threw out a separate lawsuit about Philadelphia's ability to pass its own gun laws.
That suit, filed by city council members Darrell L. Clarke and Donna Reed Miller, sought to have a court declare that the city could pass its own firearms laws. Their attorney, George Bochetto, said the suit amounted to a pre-emptive strike and that he expects the matter to end up in the state Supreme Court.
In that ruling, the appeals court noted that the state Supreme Court previously upheld the state's exclusive right to enact gun laws.
City officials have been pushing to pass local gun laws as they try to lower the city's homicide rate. The city had 392 murders last year, the vast majority of them by handguns; the murder rate is down about 15 percent this year, with 296 killings through Tuesday.
Pennsylvania, which has nearly 1 million licensed hunters, has long been known as a strong gun rights state, partly because hunting tradition runs deep in many places outside urban centers.
Shields said he is confident the court will rule in the NRA's favor.
"The only reason we lose is if precedent means nothing," he said. "The Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue
The NRA is challenging a series of gun control measures that City Council passed in an effort to combat gun violence. Mayor Michael Nutter signed the bills even though the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has previously upheld the state's exclusive right to enact gun laws.
Lawyer C. Scott Shields, who represents the NRA, said the city simply isn't allowed to regulate firearms. Shields, a Republican, also is the elected mayor of Rutledge.
"When you deal with firearms rights, you deal with constitutional rights which have statewide concern," Shields told the Commonwealth Court during arguments Wednesday. "If you're not a prohibited person and you own an AR-15, that's lawful."
After City Council passed the five gun control ordinances in April, a city judge blocked two of them. Common Pleas Judge Jane Cutler Greenspan ruled that it would almost certainly be illegal for the city to implement the two measures, a one-gun-a-month limit and an assault-weapons ban.
But she allowed three other measures to stand. Those laws require gun owners to report lost or stolen guns within 48 hours; allow police to confiscate guns from people who are considered a danger; and prohibit anyone subject to a protection-from-abuse order from possessing a gun.
The NRA is challenging all five ordinances, although attorneys focused on the proposed assault-weapons ban in court Tuesday.
"Most of my clients have machine guns," Shields said. "They are absolutely lawful."
Police already have the authority to seize weapons if they are being used unlawfully, he said.
But a city attorney, Richard Feder, said he believes that state law is unclear over what weapons are banned and what weapons are not banned.
"The NRA presented no evidence that these weapons have any civilized purpose whatsoever in our society," Feder said.
The city ordinances, he said, also would impose only "minimal, incidental imposition" on the rights of lawful gun purchasers.
A 1974 state law says that only the General Assembly can regulate guns, but the Philadelphia case is being watched by other cities in the state. Allentown and Pottsville have passed measures requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen guns. Other cities, including Pittsburgh and Lancaster, have considered similar legislation.
In September, the Commonwealth Court threw out a separate lawsuit about Philadelphia's ability to pass its own gun laws.
That suit, filed by city council members Darrell L. Clarke and Donna Reed Miller, sought to have a court declare that the city could pass its own firearms laws. Their attorney, George Bochetto, said the suit amounted to a pre-emptive strike and that he expects the matter to end up in the state Supreme Court.
In that ruling, the appeals court noted that the state Supreme Court previously upheld the state's exclusive right to enact gun laws.
City officials have been pushing to pass local gun laws as they try to lower the city's homicide rate. The city had 392 murders last year, the vast majority of them by handguns; the murder rate is down about 15 percent this year, with 296 killings through Tuesday.
Pennsylvania, which has nearly 1 million licensed hunters, has long been known as a strong gun rights state, partly because hunting tradition runs deep in many places outside urban centers.
Shields said he is confident the court will rule in the NRA's favor.
"The only reason we lose is if precedent means nothing," he said. "The Supreme Court has already ruled on this issue
0
-
one way around the law requiring people to report lost or stolen guns is to tell the cops they lost them...then in the future if they are found in possesion of guns they said they lost they can say they found them months ago...there is no mention of any law requiring anyone to tell the police if they find their lost guns....might be a loop hole to use...i`d try it anyway. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
1 comment