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.

US Senate
Bob Casey

• Facebook

Arlen Specter

• Twitter – @SenArlenSpecter
• Facebook

US Congress
Jason Altmire

• Facebook

Christopher Carney

• Twitter – @ChrisCarneyPa10
• Facebook

Charlie Dent

• Twitter – @DentforCongress
• Facebook

Jim Gerlach

• Twitter – @JimGerlach
• Facebook

Tim Holden

• Twitter – @TimHoldenPA17
• Facebook

Paul Kanjorski

• Twitter – @kanjo4congress
• Facebook

Patrick Murphy

• Facebook

Tim Murphy

• Twitter – @RepTimMurphy
• Facebook

Joe Pitts

• Twitter – @JoePitts4PA
• Facebook

Todd Platts

• Facebook

Bill Shuster

• Twitter – @RepBillShuster
• Facebook

Glenn Thompson

• Twitter – @CongressmanGT
• Facebook

State Officials
Tom Corbett

• Twitter – @CorbettforGov
• Facebook

Joe Scarnati

Karen Boback

• Facebook

Michele Brooks

Bryan Cutler

• Twitter – @RepBryanCutler
• Facebook

Bill DeWeese

Glen Grell

• Facebook

Rob Kauffman

• Facebook

Mark Keller

• Facebook

John Maher

Daryl Metcalfe

• Twitter – @DarylMetcalfe

Merle Phillips

Kathy Rapp

RoseMarie Swanger

• Facebook

Will Tallman

• Facebook

Katie True

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.

• H.B. 40 – Castle Doctrine
• H.B. 750 – Correcting Firearm Transportaion Laws
• H.B. 1541 – Punishing Municipalities for Premption Violations

Articles reporting on the event:

• GrassrootsPA
• PittsburgLive
• Whyy.org
• KYW1060
• WITF

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

Most voters don’t spend Friday night tuned into PCN – Pennsylvania’s version of C-SPAN – to watch coverage of small political events. Perhaps that’s what the Democratic gubernatorial candidates were counting on when they debated at the Pennsylvania Progressive Summit. Hoping gun owners, especially those registered with their party, wouldn’t find out, each of the candidates pledged to support various gun control policies.

Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato launched his slate of new gun control policies with a statewide lost and stolen law, followed by ending preemption (particularly if he can’t get the lost and stolen legislation passed), and mandatory “child safety locks.” Onorato did not specify whether his mandatory lock policy would apply to only sales of firearms or whether it would also apply to gun storage.

Auditor General Jack Wagner dodged most state policy issues on gun rights, describing his agenda as keeping guns out of the hands of “bad people.” The one specific policy Wagner highlighted was his support of a ban on semi-automatic rifles.

Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty made ending preemption the priority gun control agenda item in his response at the debate. The second policy he would push if elected governor is to institute one gun-a-month restrictions for all gun sales in Pennsylvania. He did not expand on whether this included a formal registry of gun owners and their purchasers, so we’re left with little information on how such sales would be tracked and restricted.

Montgomery County Commissioner Joe Hoeffel ended the round of answers with little more than a political version of “all of the above.” Specifically, he named these priorities: gun sales limits, lost and stolen legislation, mandatory locks, and the end of state preemption. In addition to the previously discussed issues, Hoeffel also supports a ban on private sales of firearms in Pennsylvania.

No Republican candidates took part in the debate, though organizers indicated that invitations were extended.

This ruling sets us up very nicely for a future court battle on all these Lost and Stolen ordinances, provided the Supreme Court is unwilling to revisit Ortiz, which I suspect it won’t.  The City of Philadelphia is losing on virtually all their arguments.  These ordinances were never about lost and stolen guns, straw purchasers or assault weapons, but were merely a means for the City to regain the ability to violate the Pennsylvania Constitution at will, so it could ban guns.  It’s looking increasingly unlikely that ploy will work.

Legislation requiring gun owners tell police if their firearm is lost or stolen will be considered by Harrisburg City Council after Tuesday’s recommendation of support from council’s public safety committee.

Under the proposal anyone discovering the loss or theft of their firearm must tell city police within 24 hours or face a fine of from $50 to $1,000 or up to 90 days in jail.

These laws are more feel-good legislation that allows city councils to tell their constituents they are doing something while not actually doing anything, and on top of that they are completely illegal because firearm regulation is reserved for the state legislature under Pa.C.S. § 6120:

John Hohenwarter, NRA Pennsylvania State Liaison, earlier Tuesday told The Patriot-News “Harrisburg does not have the authority to go out and pass their own ordinance” because firearms can only be regulated at the state level. He said the same is true of the five other cities. “The bottom line is they don’t have the authority to do it so why are they even debating it?”

But nevermind the law, Council President Linda Thompson Explains:

Council President Linda Thompson said the impact of gun violence on the city trumps any threat of legal challenge.

It’s interesting how if a citizen ignores the law they go to jail, but if a city council does it it’s a moral responsibility. Funny how that works.

We Pennsylvanians are fortunate to have a number of our Congressional delegation among the signers, and they deserve our thanks and praise.  Those Representatives are:

• Tim Holden (PA-17) Dauphin, Lebanon, Schuylkill, Parts of Berks and Perry.
• Paul Kanjorski (PA-11) Carbon, Columbia, Monroe, Lackawanna, Luzerne
• John Murtha (PA-12) Greene County, Parts of nearly half the southwest.
• Christopher Carney (PA-10) Wayne, Pike, Susquehanna, Bradford, Sullivan, etc
• Jason Altmire (PA-04) Allegheny County, Beaver, Butler, parts of others.

But in addition to those above who voted to protect our Second Amendment rights, we should also note those Democrats who chose not to take any preemptive action:

• Robert Brady (PA-01) (Philadelphia)
• Chaka Fattah (PA-02) (Philadelphia)
• Joe Sestak (PA-07) Delaware Co. Chester County (Part)
• Patrick Murphy (PA-08) Bucks County, Philadelphia (Part)
• Allyson Schwartz (PA-13) Montgomery County, Philadelphia (Part)
• Kathleen A. Dahlkemper (PA-3) Erie County, Parts of Surrounding counties
• Michael F Doyle (PA-14) Allegeny County (Pittsburgh)

If your representative is on the first list, call them and thank them for their support.  If they are on the latter list, ask them why they were not among the signers.

This is a very important development in terms of the likelihood we’ll be looking at a new Assault Weapons Ban in the 111th Congress.  It takes 218 votes to pass a bill out of Congress, and with these 65 Democrats, we could lose 28 Republicans, and a renewal still would not have the votes to pass the House.  If Obama wishes to pass a renewal of the failed semi-auto ban of the Clinton years, it will be, at best, an uphill battle.

But this is not to say that gun owners are out of the woods.  We still have anti-gun leadership in key positions in Congress, and still have one of the most anti-gun Presidents in history occupying the Oval Office.  This pass over the mountains may be blocked for the time being, but we must think about where they will try to cross next.

“The attorney general also suggested that re-instituting a U.S. ban on the sale of assault weapons would help reduce the bloodshed in Mexico, where last year 6,000 people were killed in drug-related violence.”

This should not come as a surprise to anyone who has followed Mr. Holder’s career and nomination.

[H/T: Snowflakes In Hell]

The York City Council on Wednesday tabled a controversial gun proposal at the request of the mayor, despite four council members saying they oppose the legislation.

The proposal, introduced by Councilwoman Toni Smith and backed by York Mayor John Brenner, would require gun owners to report lost or stolen guns within 72 hours.

…

Councilman Cameron Texter said solicitor Shaleeta Washington gave council an opinion saying it would be best to wait because of a state law that prohibits municipalities from making their own gun laws.

[Via the York Daily Record]

The San Francisco Housing Authority has agreed to allow its residents to own guns in a settlement of a National Rifle Association lawsuit that followed last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the right to bear arms.

In papers filed Monday with a federal judge, the Housing Authority agreed not to enforce a provision it added to tenant leases in 2005 prohibiting the possession of guns and ammunition. The ban will now apply only to illegal gun ownership, like possession of a machine gun or possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

[Via San Francisco Chronicle]