Latest on lawsuit: Philly v. NRA members

[K-Romulus]

Here is the latest blather; now the Philly gov. is using discredited trace data to try and smear the plaintiffs challenging Philly's unconstitutional gun bans. Looks like last-ditch desperation to me . . .

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/19100459.html

Nutter: New laws will stop illegal flow of guns

By Barbara Boyer

INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

New city laws to control the number of guns sold in Philadelphia are meant to stop the illegal flow of guns to criminals and not meant to stop legal sales, Mayor Nutter emphasized in a morning news conference.

The conference was scheduled hours before city officials return to court this afternoon to argue over whether the city can independently pass legislation to limit gun sales here.

The mayor has already signed legislation backed by City Council. The National Rifle Association and other groups, including gun dealers, have filed a civil lawsuit to block the laws.

With Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey at his side along with gun expert Joseph Vince and city solicitor Shelley R. Smith, Nutter said there are three simple points behind the legislation he signed.

First, the legislation will not impact lawful purchases (K-Rom: except it imposes a NYC-style ban on "assault weapons" - turn them in or get them out of the city). Second, federal authorities recommend such legislation as a way to curb gun violence. Third, the gun dealers trying to stop the legislation are ones that engage in multiple sales to a single purchaser - and those guns often end up at crime scenes, Nutter said.

"These gun traffickers are not going to stop us from keeping the citizens of Philadelphia safe," Nutter said.

Ramsey noted that while homicides are down 24 percent this year, 80 percent of the murders are committed with guns. Additionally, he said, nearly 2,000 guns have been confiscated so far this year in the city.

"We've got to do something," Ramsey said. "And these laws go a long way for putting in place reasonable steps to protect the citizens of Philadelphia."

The mayor acknowledged that the city is fighting the NRA, a strong lobbying group that has successfully stopped legislation at the state and federal levels.

Nutter said he can't understand why the NRA would not support legislation that would stop criminals from obtaining weapons, why multiple purchases - sometimes numerous guns bought within five days - are needed or why the sale of assault rifles should be legal.

Enforcing the pending legislation, however, appears to be an uphill fight for the mayor.

A Philadelphia judge appears poised to grant the NRA's request to block enforcement; the fight likely will continue to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Previous rulings by the high court established that the state regulates firearms, not the city.

Nutter, however, said that does not deter him and said the city's expert, Vince, formerly of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, will be in court this afternoon to testify that those gun shops trying to ban the legislation are responsible for large amounts of multiple sales and guns found at crime scenes.

"We are talking about illegal guns in the hands of criminals," Nutter said.

and earlier today (includes brief background on the lawsuit):

http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/19092049.html

City, NRA to face off on gun laws

By CHRIS BRENNAN
Philadelphia Daily News

[email protected] 215-854-5973
A Common Pleas Court judge will consider legal arguments from the city and the National Rifle Association today on whether five local gun-control laws passed last month should be enforced.

Judge Jane Cutler Greenspan, who last month issued a temporary restraining order to keep the city from enforcing the laws, is considering whether to make the order permanent.

The NRA, pointing to a state Supreme Court ruling from 1996, insists that only the state can regulate firearms.

The city concedes that the state regulates lawful firearm ownership, but says the local laws are meant to control the illegal possession of firearms by criminals.

"We have a responsibility to the citizens of this city to take whatever steps are lawful to try to address the gun violence in this city," City Solicitor Shelley Smith said after a hearing on the issue yesterday.

Greenspan ordered the city and the NRA to condense their positions into writing by this morning, in advance of an afternoon hearing.

The city wanted to offer testimony from 10 witnesses, including Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey and a retired ATF agent, along with 75 exhibits that included two semiautomatic assault rifles. The city planned to use that testimony to argue that there is "no common lawful purpose" for assault weapons.

But NRA attorney C. Scott Shields objected to such a lengthy proceeding.

"What we're trying to circumvent now is putting on a dog and pony show of having to listen to all the different reasons why the city needs gun control," Shields said. "They should really be concerned about criminal control."

The local laws would limit handgun purchases to one a month, make it a crime to not report a lost or stolen gun within 48 hours, allow police to confiscate guns with a judge's approval from people considered a danger to themselves or others, prohibit gun possession by people subject to protection from abuse orders and ban semiautomatic weapons with clips that hold 10 or more rounds.

Susan L. Burke, an attorney hired by the city to fight the case, said that putting the arguments down on paper for the judge to consider preserves the city's right to contest those issues when the case is appealed to a higher court.

Ultimately, the city is hoping to force a reconsideration of the 1996 state Supreme Court ruling.

Greenspan seemed to have little interest in ruling against that precedent. She said at one point that it was "plain as day" that the Supreme Court had decided that the state and not the city has the power to regulate firearms.

"Your claim has to go to the state," Greenspan told city attorneys. "That's where you need to make your case."

The hearing drew a small crowd of demonstrators from X-Offenders for Community Empowerment, a group of men who previously served prison terms, some for crimes with guns.

It also drew Ruth Hayes, whose 27-year-old daughter was gunned down in January 2007 in her home by a jealous ex-boyfriend. Hayes was upset that Greenspan told the city attorneys to take their claim to the state.

"It's not right," Hayes sobbed later while clutching a photo of her daughter. "We need to let the city handle its problems." *

Good on the judge for deep-sixing the media circus.

 

[Henry Bowman]

prohibit gun possession by people subject to protection from abuse orders

Do they really mean that people who are supposed to be subject to protection [i.e., the victims] would be prohibited from possessing guns?

 

[General Geoff]

I think they mean the other way around (i.e. the supposed abusers).


I don't see how more laws (which will inevitably be broken) can possibly lead to fewer illegal acts.

 

[Henry Bowman]

I see. More like "prohibit gun possession by people subject to protection-from-abuse orders." Isn't that already covered by the Lautenberg Act?

 

[romma]

Nutter said he can't understand why the NRA would not support legislation that would stop criminals from obtaining weapons, why multiple purchases

I can explain it to Mayor Nutter.

Because gun-grabbing politicians have an insatiable appetite for such things. There is never enough guns to grab to satisfy their craving, and they will go to any limits to get what it is they want...

Trampling all over the constitutuion, and everyones' rights in the process....


To flip it around, I can't understand why Mayor Nutter doesn't get that.

 

[Standing Wolf]

The city concedes that the state regulates lawful firearm ownership, but says the local laws are meant to control the illegal possession of firearms by criminals.

Did these people finish high school? If they're concerned about criminals' possession of firearms, why don't they arrest the criminals?

 

[m38shooter]

Ramsey noted that while homicides are down 24 percent this year, 80 percent of the murders are committed with guns. Additionally, he said, nearly 2,000 guns have been confiscated so far this year in the city.

And if these laws stick and they ACTUALLY manage to enforce them, then next year 80% of murders will be committed with knives. The next logical step from there would be to require a background and licensing for kitchen utensil purchases.

 

[Master Blaster]

The problem is that all of the cop killers were out of jail on the street taking advantage of and corrupting innocent guns.

Nuttjob cant arrest the criminals or keep them in jail, so he puts on a whinning dog and pony show to distract peoples attention from the real problems. He doesnt expect to correct the crime problem but instead hopes to distract the voter's attention from the real issue. The inability to supervise criminals who are out of jail on parole, unemployed and unrepenatant life long criminals.

 

[Flyboy]

I see. More like "prohibit gun possession by people subject to protection-from-abuse orders." Isn't that already covered by the Lautenberg Act?

Yes, but this way, it's double-secret-illegal!

 

[Z-Michigan]

I'm amused by the proposal to ban clips that hold more than 10 rounds. I've yet to see stripper clips for more than 10 rounds, and a Garand clip with more than 8 would be extremely awkward, I think. And I would just love to see moon clips for a revolver with an 11-shot cylinder. (I'm sure Taurus will bring one out.)

Just so long as they don't care about magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, I'm OK.

 

[K-Romulus]

Z-Mich: it gets better. The reporter doesn't know something from a hole in the ground. The Phila. "assault weapons ban" outlaws semi-auto or pump-action rifles that have internal magazines that hold more than ten rounds, BUT IT STILL allows detachable magazines to hold up to 16 rounds(!).

Pure "jenius!"