The Second Amendment is now incorporated to cover state and local governments according to today’s opinion released in McDonald vs. Chicago. According to SCOTUS Blog, the decision has been released today, and we’ll have more details as the opinion is shared with the public.
In the meantime, please take a few minutes to thank the members of the legislative branches of government who worked on our behalf to encourage the Supreme Court toward this position. Read more
A few weeks ago Bryan Lentz (D-161) introduced House Bill 2536, a bill designed to gut the way reciprocity of Pennsylvania Licenses To Carry Firearms are handled in the Commonwealth. With a few small changed to wording, Rep. Lentz’s bill attempts to implement the misguided anti-gun agenda laid out by Philadelphia’s anti-gun crowd and remove the ability for Pennsylvania residents to carry a firearm on an out-of-state permit. The justification by gun control proponents for such a drastic restriction on your rights boils down to a handful of claims that Pennsylvania residents who were arrested (but not yet convicted) who subsequently had their permits revoked, continued to carry on out-of-state permits. In the eyes of anti-rights groups, you are apparently guilty until proven innocent.
The truth behind the matter however is that most Pennsylvania residents who seek out-of-state permits do so not to avoid the law, but to avoid abuses by their issuing authority, namely the Philadelphia Police Department. It is well known among Philadelphia residents and anyone who is paying attention that Philadelphia only begrudgingly complies with state law when issuing LTCFs and does everything in it’s power to prevent Philadelphia residents from receiving them. They force you to apply in person and limit the hours they allow this to the middle of work days, they demand additional documentation not outlined in state law and require character witnesses to execute affidavits. If you can actually get this far it is not unlikely that the Philadelphia Police Department will look for any excuse to deny issuing your permit, such as in the case of one Korean War Vet who claims being denied for having admitted to “pointing guns and shooting at people” – in reference to his service record.
These abuses are just examples of what happens in the process of applying for a LTCF through the Philadelphia Police Department, should you actually receive one they will look for any excuse to revoke it. For example, if a criminal breaks into your house and steals a firearm, the Philadelphia Police will twist that into a justification to revoke your LTCF. As ridiculous as it sounds, this happens every day and may explain why Philadelphia County is responsible for 30-40% of all state-wide revocations each year.
The irony of House Bill 2536 is that in attempting to use poor arguments to push extreme legislation, anti-gun forces have simply shone a spotlight on abuses by issuing authorities throughout the Commonwealth. As a result gun owners need to be oppose House Bill 2536 in it’s current form (printer’s no. 3790) and demand reform to prevent subjective abuses by issuing authorities.
Tomorrow, the House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on Castle Doctrine legislation – a move we’ve been waiting on since November 19 when they held a hearing! However, it comes at a price.
In addition to the vote on the important self-defense reforms, the committee is planning to vote on three anti-gun bills on the same day!
Contact the members of the House Judiciary Committee today. Tell them that you want their support on HB40 – the Castle Doctrine bill. This specific Castle Doctrine bill will ensure that law-abiding gun owners can feel safe knowing that they can defend themselves from attackers whether it is inside or outside your home. It also protects citizens from the expense of fighting civil lawsuits filed by criminals or their families when self-defense was justified.
But tell them that they must vote down the three gun control bills:
Self-defense reform should not come with a price that includes gun bans, wasteful spending on a new government-funded anti-gun leader, and gutting our state’s gun laws.
Contact the members of the House Judiciary Committee today. Based on the response to Castle Doctrine in other states, we know that gun control groups will get involved in this fight, making it seem as if we will have gun fights on every street corner. As we know, such dire predictions have yet to come true. Make sure you voice is heard! Call, e-mail, or even tweet – just make sure your voice is heard!
« Email Judiciary Committee Members with two clicks! »
« Show support for Castle Doctrine on Twitter with two clicks! »
Below are the members of the committee who have not signaled clear support for our rights on these four bills. Please focus your efforts on contacting these lawmakers.
| Representative | Phone Number | Alternative Contact |
|---|---|---|
| State Rep. Thomas Caltagirone (D-127) | (717) 787-3525 | |
| State Rep. Kathy Manderino (D-194) | (717) 787-1254 | |
| State Rep. John Pallone (D-54) | (717) 783-1819 | |
| State Rep. Dom Costa (D-21) | (717) 783-9114 | |
| State Rep. Joseph Brennan (D-133) | (717) 772-9902 | |
| State Rep. Paul Drucker (D-157) | (717) 705-2003 |
Email |
| State Rep. Bryan Lentz (D-161) | (717) 787-8574 |
Email |
| State Rep. Josh Shapiro (D-153) | (717) 783-7619 |
Email |
| State Rep. Greg Vitali (D-166) | (717) 787-7647 | |
| State Rep. Chelsa Wagner (D-22) | (717) 783-1582 |
Email |
| State Rep. Ronald Waters (D-191) | (717) 772-9850 | |
| State Rep. Ron Marsico (R-105) | (717) 783-2014 | |
| State Rep. Mike Vereb (R-150) | (717) 705-7164 | |
| State Rep. Will Gabig (R-199) | (717) 772-2280 | |
| State Rep. Dick Stevenson (R-8) | (717) 783-6438 | |
| State Rep. Glen Grell (R-87) | (717) 783-2063 | |
| State Rep. Kate Harper (R-61) | (717) 787-2801 | |
| State Rep. Bernie O’Neill (R-29) | (717) 705-7170 | |
| State Rep. Katie True (R-41) | (717) 705-7161 |
At last month’s Right to Keep and Bear Arms Rally, PAFOA not only embraced using Twitter and Facebook as a means of spreading news, but members used coordinated tags to have and track conversations about the events. Using the hashtag #2ARally, gun owners were able to label their live reports so folks at home could track them, and they could find each other in real time and in real life through this new digital medium.
This weekend, that same example will play itself out on a much larger scale at the NRA Annual Meeting in Charlotte, North Carolina. Much like PAFOA, NRA has now set up a Twitter account to make announcements, share news, and stir up the conversation about the event – @AnnualMeetings. In addition, they have embraced a hashtag already used by members, #NRAAM. It will allow members to keep track of what others are doing, seeing, and experiencing on the floor.
In addition, members are organizing a Foursquare swarm for users of the location services social application. By “checking in” using the service, it announces to the user’s closest friends that they are taking part in a massive event – upwards of 80,000 people are predicted to attend this year’s festivities.
Given that the NRA Annual Meeting is a much larger affair than the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Rally, it also makes sense that NRA has finally expanded into mobile technology for users on site to keep up with everything going on. In recent weeks, they have announced both an iPhone app and a mobile Annual Meeting website. With more than 6 acres of exhibit halls and events that span three days, it makes sense to enter into this new arena of technology.
With the NRA bringing their show to Pittsburgh in 2011, the first use of many of these technologies will be a great trial run in Charlotte.
In the mean time, are any PAFOA members planning to attend the events in Charlotte? If so, will you use Twitter, Foursquare, or the mobile tools? If you’re staying at home this year, will you follow along with the Twitter conversation by using the hashtag? Give us your answers in the PAFOA Blog forum.
Yesterday, hundreds gathered outside the capitol to declare support for the 2nd Amendment. Speakers included Suzanna Gratia Hupp, Wayne LaPierre (NRA), Larry Pratt (GOA), Marinelle Thompson (2nd Amendment Sisters), and more.
Following the rally, participants formed over a dozen groups which visited the offices of state representatives. Dialoging with both pro-2nd Amendment and anti-gun legislators, seeking support for a number of pro-rights bills.
Articles reporting on the event:
Want to rally with hundreds (maybe thousands!) of your fellow gun owners? Are you ready to tell lawmakers that it’s time for action on important issues like Castle Doctrine and our transportation laws? Are you still trying to figure out your own transportation plan?
REGISTER NOW FOR THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS RALLY
PAFOA has created special discussion threads on our forums where you can organize with other gun owners for a ride share to Harrisburg. Whether you’ve got a full-sized van with rows of seating, a family sedan with a couple of spots around the baby seat, or a motorcycle with sidecar, you can find folks in your area who may be willing to share expenses and keep you company.
| Region | Counties | Forum Thread |
|---|---|---|
| Lake Erie Region | Crawford, Erie, Mercer & Venango Counties | Forum Thread |
| Allegheny National Forest Region | Cameron, Clarion, Clearfield, Elk, Forest, Jefferson, McKean, Potter, Tioga & Warren Counties | Forum Thread |
| Valleys of the Susquehanna Region | Centre, Clinton, Columbia, Juniata, Lycoming, Mifflin, Montour, Northumberland, Snyder & Union Counties | Forum Thread |
| Pocono Mountain Region | Bradford, Carbon, Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe, Pike, Schuylkill, Sullivan, Susquehanna, Wayne & Wyoming Counties | Forum Thread |
| Lehigh Valley & Philadelphia Region | Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Lehigh, Montgomery, Northampton & Philadelphia Counties | Forum Thread |
| PA Dutch Country/Hershey Region | Adams, Berks, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Lancaster, Lebanon, Perry & York Counties | Forum Thread |
| Laurel Highlands Region | Bedford, Blair, Cambria, Fayette, Fulton, Greene, Huntingdon, Indiana, Somerset & Westmoreland Counties | Forum Thread |
| Pittsburgh Region | Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Lawrence & Washington Counties | Forum Thread |
The “Lost and Stolen” ordinances that have been introduced by Mayors Against Illegal Guns and CeaseFire PA, in communities around the Commonwealth, have come to the Southeast. But we’re happy to report these ordinances, which are illegal, and violate state preemption, have run into some trouble. That trouble is gun owners.
We’re very proud of some of the work of our individual members in helping to frustrate and defeat the passage of virtually all of the ordinances that have been introduced in the new year. First in Radnor, which has tabled the bill for now. On the same day CeaseFire Pennsylvania was pushing for the ordinance in Radnor, Mayors Against Illegal Guns pushed Lost and Stolen in Hatboro. Hatboro has rejected the ordinance in favor of a resolution, which they will be hearing Monday March 22nd. We still oppose the resolution, which urges the General Assembly to pass a statewide law, but we’ve made progress. Ambler Borough decided not to pursue an ordinance a few weeks ago. This week Swarthmore, Pennsylvania has decided to table its Lost and Stolen ordinance.
There is still much work to do here, but we just want to take time to thank our members who put so much time and energy into helping organize other gun owners to fight these ordinances. We particularly want to thank those members who were residents of these municipalities who showed up to speak out against the ordinance to their local elected officials. If we can replicate this excellent example of organization and motivation across the Commonwealth, perhaps we can begin to push Bloomberg’s Mayors group back to New York City where it belongs.
Many interest groups make the point in presidential election years that it’s not just a candidate’s personal views on issues that matter, but also concern for who is appointed to the judiciary. Rarely has the need to pay attention to these consequences been so obvious for gun owners as the last week.
The obvious issue is the Supreme Court and McDonald v. Chicago. Yes, we will all wait as the Justices deliberate and issue their final decision on how the Second Amendment will be incorporated. But for political junkies, who didn’t hold their breath as they read the headline generated from rumors that Chief Justice John Roberts would step down? (For more information about how that rumor was generated from a 1L class at Georgetown to headlines, read this account.) If the rumor had proved to be true, suddenly the Heller 5 would be no more, and the litigation that will likely define the contours of the Second Amendment would be at risk since the likely replacement would not be friendly to our rights.
Another reason for gun owners to be concerned was on display at the Huffington Post this week. Former federal judge H. Lee Sarokin wrote about the recent issues with carry in Starbucks and put his real feelings about the right to bear arms on the record. His perception of those who carry firearms for protection is a stereotypical and disconnected vision of uneducated, racist, and trigger happy men. While we are fortunate that Judge Sarokin has been off of the bench for more than a decade, the idea that more appointees like him may still be deciding future Second Amendment cases is disturbing. (Judge Sarokin was appointed by President Carter to the United States District Court (N.J.) and elevated to the United States Court of Appeals (3rd Cir.) by President Clinton.)
While most voters only think about the Supreme Court when they think about judicial concerns at the ballot box, Judge Sarokin is a reminder that federal appointments at various levels can make a difference in issues we care about. Once the McDonald decision does come down, it will leave many detailed questions about the permissible scope of gun control laws to be answered by lower courts. However, those appointments rarely receive the scrutiny and attention of Supreme Court nominees.
Oral arguments were heard today by the Supreme Court in McDonald v. City of Chicago, IL. At the center of the case is Chicago’s effective ban on handgun ownership. Several other issues are addressed in the petition as well. These include mandatory firearm registration, mandatory reporting of changes to registration status of any firearm, and the rule which renders any firearm whose registration has lapsed no longer eligible for registration.
Lawyers from both side were given the chance to argue their sides before the Justices today, but the overwhelming public opinion is that the Justices will side with the same division as the Heller opinion in a 5 to 4 decision. In Heller, Justices Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito sided in favor of second amendment rights while the remaining Justices dissented. The case is important to both sides as it will have sweeping effects on the ability of states to restrict citizens second amendment rights.
Filed on the same day the Heller decision was decided, this case differs, if only slightly. Washington, D.C. , the center of the Heller case, is of direct federal jurisdiction rather than a city with local and state jurisdictions applying. During arguments today, the divide remained
Link to the case briefs: McDonald v. City of Chicago, IL, Docket No. 08-1521
The coverage is wide, but here are some relevant articles:
By its conclusion, it seemed plain that the court would extend a 2008 decision that first identified an individual right to own guns to strike down Chicago’s gun control law, widely considered the most restrictive in the nation.
New York Times: Supreme Court Still Divided On Guns
The Supreme Court seemed likely to rule for the first time that gun possession is fundamental to American freedom, a move that would give federal judges power to strike down state and local weapons laws for infringing on Second Amendment rights.
The Wall Street Journal: New Ammunition for Gun Rights
To no one’s surprise, the justices gave no sign that they’ve changed their minds in the past two years. Several talked as if the issue when they rule won’t be whether to restrain gun control nationwide but how much room to leave for “reasonable” state and local limits. And that, indeed, is the important question.
Our view on the Second Amendment: Extend gun rights, but leave room for reasonable limits
Gun owners across the country will be watching the McDonald case closely on Tuesday. Though, admittedly, the pro-liberty folks in areas with heavy gun control will likely be paying more attention to the arguments. Because Pennsylvania doesn’t have the extreme gun control conditions of Chicago and we have protections under the state constitution, we’re unlikely to see a direct impact from the case in the Keystone State.
However, never let it be said that Pennsylvania doesn’t have a voice in the arguments before the Supreme Court on Tuesday. In fact, we’re lucky to have more than 30 pro-gun lawmakers standing up for our rights in this case.
At the federal level, 15 members of our Congressional delegation signed on to a brief in support of the law-abiding citizens who would like to own a handgun in Chicago. This total includes both Senators and every member of Congress except the Philadelphia-area representatives, and those representing Pittsburgh and Erie.
Coming down to the state level, the most high profile supporter of the McDonald case is Attorney General Tom Corbett who signed a brief with more than three dozen other Attorneys General. However, it’s easy to miss the state legislators who were pro-active in signing on to various briefs in favor of the plaintiffs.
Five female lawmakers joined a brief outlining the concerns of women who face state and local governments that seek to limit their right to self-protection. In addition, one Senator and 11 Representatives put their names on a general state legislator brief that points out a clear direction from the Supreme Court in favor of incorporation will better serve the states and help to secure the fundamental rights of their citizens.
So if you have time on Tuesday, take a few moments to thank the following lawmakers for standing up for our rights. I’ve included links to social media homes where you can publicly thank them if you have an account:
Federal
Senator Arlen Specter
*Twitter
*Facebook
Representative Jason Altmire
*Facebook
Representative Christopher Carney
*Facebook
Representative Charlie Dent
*Facebook
Representative Jim Gerlach
*Twitter
*Facebook
Representative Paul Kanjorski
*Twitter
*Facebook
Representative Patrick Murphy
*Facebook
Representative John Murtha
Representative Joe Pitts
*Twitter
*Facebook
Representative Todd Platts
*Facebook
