PA Dems want your guns, kinda
[jackdied]
Apr 11 2007, 22:48 EDT [updated Apr 28 2007, 08:47 EDT]
In Pennsylvania the Democrats picked up state house seats in the recent mid-term elections. PA is a "purple" state so a swing of a few seats either way makes some difference in legislative outcomes and a much larger swing in legislative proposals (i.e. bluff and bluster). I was born in the Great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania but have since moved (to the less great commonwealth of MA) so I was a bit slow to pick up on the current events. The emboldened majory is sowing its oats by proposing some new gun laws (hat tip to Alphecca). As I have mentioned previously gun politics in PA are very strange. Philadelphia and Pittsburgh lobby the state for heavy controls and the rest of the state fights the cities. In the past the cities were allowed to have their own local gun control laws but more recently they were barred from overriding state law by the state supreme court. Fun quote:
Article 1, Section 21 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania
provides:
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of
themselves and the State shall not be questioned.
Because the ownership of firearms is constitutionally protected,
its regulation is a matter of statewide concern. The constitution
does not provide that the right to bear arms shall not be
questioned in any part of the commonwealth, except Philadelphia and
Pittsburgh, where it may be abridged at will, but that it shall not
be questioned in any part of the commonwealth.
Strong opinions (and constitutional provisions!) aside gun laws in PA are largely up for grabs. The proposed law reads as
The proposal, under consideration by the House Judiciary Committee, would require gun owners to pay a registration fee of $10 per weapon per year, undergo a state police criminal background check and submit detailed personal information for a registry that would include fingerprints, Social Security numbers, birth dates and passport-sized photographs.
First and most obviously this would only impact people that obeyed the law. So all the people that were certain enough that they weren't going to commit a crime in the next twelve months would submit their fingerprints, photos, and $10. The ten dollars itself is a phantom. How much would someone have to pay you to turn over a set of fingerprints, a head shot, and spend time doing all that paper work? The privilege of owning a gun would cost far more than $10 and if you miss the renewal by a week you are not only a felon your name, address, and affirmation that you own an "illegal" gun is on file (you must still have it or you would be in violation of the law by not filing transfer papers).
Criminals? Still off book and not following this law effects them the same as when they weren't following the old laws. The only ones hurt are the people that had guns legally i.e. people who had no criminal records in the first place and never will except if this law is passed to make them one.
[much later] Normally I leave posts unedited if, after a day or so, the errors aren't glaringly offensive (bobsalive is my copilot). I updated this post much later because "sowing its oats" and "sewing its oats" just ain't the same. I'll let other errors stand.
