Defensive Carry banner

Local Article on "Reasonable" Gun Laws

955 views 12 replies 11 participants last post by  GM 
#1 ·
#3 ·
So many things wrong in this article, but this one is especially nice:
"...allows state residents to sidestep law enforcement and obtain permits from Florida to carry concealed guns, even if their applications were denied in Pennsylvania. This loophole lets people with criminal backgrounds get out-of-state permits to carry guns in the commonwealth, even after state authorities determine they shouldn’t be allowed to do so."

Somehow that doesn't jive with the real requirements: http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/eligible.html
 
#8 ·
So many things wrong in this article, but this one is especially nice:
"...allows state residents to sidestep law enforcement and obtain permits from Florida to carry concealed guns, even if their applications were denied in Pennsylvania. This loophole lets people with criminal backgrounds get out-of-state permits to carry guns in the commonwealth, even after state authorities determine they shouldn’t be allowed to do so."
Wow. So Florida doesn't require a background check before issuing a concealed carry permit? Learn something new every day.
[/sarcasm]

By the way, "reasonable gun control" is an oxymoron.
 
#4 ·
Holy cats... this one got my blood boiling. I tried to find a means by which to respond, but was unsuccessful. If MP45Man or any other contributor can find a way to reply to this pollyanna-ish whine, feel free to use any or all of my words:

by Joe Grace and Phil Goldsmith
Opponents of commonsense laws to prevent gun violence…

Already, the author attempts to frame the debate by nonchalantly referring to “commonsense [sic] laws” in an appeal to emotion. The creation of laws calls for intellect and reason, but rarely emotion. We’ve heard “There oughtta be a law…!” so many times Jimmy Hatlo created a comic by that name! But one man’s “common sense” is another man’s anarchy. Let us not be deterred by vague labels.


However, the court also said clearly reasonable regulations of firearms are permitted under our Constitution. They always have been, and they always will be.
“Always have been?” Exactly which part of the Constitution describes “reasonable regulations” of firearms? The “well-regulated” term in the Second Amendment refers to “the militia”, and in the language of the time means “well-disciplined.”

CeaseFirePA believes that reasonable regulations on firearms are necessary to help police get illegal guns out of criminal hands and better protect Pennsylvanians.

There’s that term “commonsense” [sic] again.
OK, let’s talk about getting illegal guns out of criminal hands. First, let’s tighten up the language. What exactly is an “illegal gun?” One may legally purchase in Pennsylvania handguns, rifles, shotguns, and even – gasp – machine guns. All subject to state and federal laws, of course, but the only guns which are by themselves “illegal” are those from which the serial numbers have been removed (a Federal offense) and certain shotguns and rifles which, if not properly licensed at time of sale, don’t meet barrel length rules (think “sawed-off shotgun”). Beyond those fairly straightforward rules, there are no commercially-available guns in Pennsylvania which are actually “illegal.”

So let’s assume that what the authors mean by “illegal guns” are those guns which are obtained or possessed illegally. Stop right there. If a gun is obtained illegally, or possessed illegally, doesn’t that already suggest an illegal activity? Which means that there is already a law in place which has been violated, correct? So do the authors want to make new laws which will make illegal the acts which are already illegal? How does one go about outlawing that which is already prohibited by law? This is the right time to invoke the term “common sense.”

One reasonable step is a reporting requirement for lost or stolen handguns.

So some localities have laws mandating reporting the theft of a firearm. How does this after-the-fact action in any way prevent illegal possession and use of firearms? In nearly every jurisdiction in the United States, it is required by law to report a motor vehicle accident. Is this somehow a traffic safety law that prevents accidents?

While support for the reporting of lost or stolen handguns grows, hundreds of Pennsylvania police chiefs have come out in favor of another reasonable reform to close a loophole in state law that allows state residents to sidestep law enforcement and obtain permits from Florida to carry concealed guns, even if their applications were denied in Pennsylvania.
This loophole lets people with criminal backgrounds get out-of-state permits to carry guns in the commonwealth, even after state authorities determine they shouldn’t be allowed to do so.

Ah, the “loophole” problem. If you find that a law of your liking doesn’t exist, quick – label it a “loophole.” Oh, there’s no three-day waiting period to print an Op-Ed article full of mistruths in your local newspaper? Shouldn’t we call that the “First Amendment loophole?”

Right now, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania recognizes concealed carry permits from not just Florida, but fully twenty-four states in total. Nearly half the United States. This was neither an accident nor did this provision occur in a vacuum. Nearly every state in the Union which issues a concealed carry license requires fingerprinting and a criminal background check including, but not limited to, the FBI. You seem to be focused on Florida, which is fine. So if a Florida resident meets training requirements, submits fingerprints and passes an FBI background check, why on earth should Pennsylvania repeat the same process to allow this US citizen to carry a concealed firearm in PA? Given the statistically insignificant number of violent offenses committed by duly licensed civilians carrying concealed weapons, this is an expensive waste of Commonwealth resources. Pray tell, exactly how widespread is this so-called problem of ineligible Pennsylvanians carrying concealed weapons on a permit from another state? Is there some violent crime prohibited in Pennsylvania that the good ol’ boys in Florida think is maybe just “boys being boys”? Please… be serious.
Going one step further, how is a concealed carry license from Florida any less valid in Pennsylvania than a Florida driver’s license? Far more people are killed and maimed in the US each year by motor vehicles, which by any scientific measure are far deadlier than guns. But every state in the nation recognizes the driver’s license privilege granted by every other state. How can this be allowed? There is no FBI check on drivers’ licenses, no fingerprinting… isn’t this the “drivers’ license loophole”?


Gun violence is a serious public health problem in Pennsylvania and across the nation. In Pennsylvania, 1,200 people die every year from gun-related incidents (homicides, suicides and accidental shootings).

But about 1600 people are killed each year from motor vehicle accidents in PA, which includes vehicular manslaughter, accidents and suicides as well. Where is your concern for “commonsense” [sic] laws about driving?


In the last decade, 22 police officers have been shot and killed in the line of duty in our state — seven since 2009.
Nationally, the statistics are just as alarming: 530 police officers killed in the line of duty in the last decade and more than 90 percent of them with guns Accidental shootings take a terrible toll on our children.

You are absolutely correct in your bounding of the problem with criminal misuse of firearms. But if you look under a better microscope, you will find that the majority of these cases are caused by repeat offenders who have abused the second (and third and fourth) chances they have received from the “catch-and-release” criminal justice system. The violators are not the responsible citizen who exercises his Second Amendment rights.
(Oh, by the way, 5-gallon buckets are responsible for more accidental deaths of infants than are guns.)


The City Council immediately drafted a new package of reforms, including a reporting system for lost or stolen handguns.
Chicago Mayor Richard Daley explained why the city moved so swiftly after the court’s ruling: “Either we enact new and reasonable handgun laws in Chicago to protect our residents — as the council has done — or we do nothing and risk greater gun violence on our streets and in our homes.”

How ironic that Chicago should be held up as a model for “reasonable handgun laws.” Chicago has one of the highest murder rates of any city in our nation, primarily because it is nearly impossible for a responsible citizen to legally arm himself for protection against criminals. Young or old, rich or poor, black or white, if you obey the law you are unable to legally defend yourself with deadly force if you are attacked with deadly force. Please tell me how this is “common sense.”

The risk of doing nothing is unacceptable…

“The risk of doing nothing…”

This is just rhetoric, ranking right up there with “if it saves just one child…” But if you need action, then direct your focus and attention on the prosecutors who plea-bargain guns offenses down and make them disappear (“oh, they’re so hard to prove”). Hold judges accountable for the social costs caused by releasing violent criminals into the general population with simple probation or early parole. Demand that all the existing gun laws are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If you’ve covered those bases thoroughly, then and only then will your cries for more feel-good laws deserve any logical consideration.


Joe Grace is the executive director of CeaseFirePA. Phil Goldsmith is the board president of CeaseFirePA.
 
#5 ·
I can't comment.... I guess I'm with the "Yawn" comment.... another one who doesn't get it.... and uses dumb comments to argue their point.

Seven officers killed, and how many of them were killed by law-abiding CCH citizens.... not a friggin one, so they need to use their brain some.
 
#6 ·
As I have posted many times the antis use the terms "reasonable regulations/laws and "common sense regulations/law" to mean to mean every restrictive anti gun regulations/law that they can get enacted that will stand Constitutional muster. They would see all guns baned, if they could figure out how to do it.

Remember, one of the key barriers to their success is your involvement in the political fight -- not just elections, not just an occasional letter or phone call on w specific 2A related bill, but also constant monitoring of what is being done, drumming up support for or against bills, appointment, conformations, etc.

I've spent enough time lobbying and debating these anti-gun folk to know there is no intent to compromise on their part, unless it is to take all that they can get for now and go after more next round.

The Pro 2A forces have been pulling ahead for a few years now.

But this is not a sprint.

This is not even just a marathon.

It is a relay of marathons -- over generations. A never ending one, in which we need to keep going ourselves and be preparing the next generation to pass the baton to.

Make no mistake about it. We are in a fight for the survival of 2A. A fight that is far from won. So, don't let down your guard. Join and work with one or more national Pro-RKBA groups, of your choice, and more importantly join and get active with your local grassroots RKBA group.

Note what he says at the end:

...we’re working every day with legislators, mayors, police, faith leaders and citizens to see reasonable [sic] laws enacted....
There you have it.

Are you working every day with legislators, mayors, police, faith leaders and citizens to see that unreasonable laws are not enacted or are repealed?
 
#9 ·
It is always interesting to see the ideas of bliss-ninny idiots. They never want to do the simple things to stop gun crimes, like lock up the bad guys and loose the key.
 
#10 ·
↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑

BINGO!

That and:

"Someone else is responsible for keeping me safe." :soapbox:

"Nanny, nanny help me." :puke:

:rant:
 
#12 ·
I have a question, If you have a 300 to 1500 dollar hwndgun stolen, don't you reportit to LEO so you can get a report for your insurance company? I know I would. It seems to me that the only reason not to report it is selling it and not reporting the sale (already a crime). But thats just me, your mileage may varrry.
Othher tan that, the rest was slanted at about 85 degrees........
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top