Hide Transcript Show Transcript

WEAPON IN THE CITY. SUPPORTERS APPLIED CITY COUNSEL FOR PASSING NEW GUN LAWS AIMED AT BANNING THE USE OF THE AR-15, AMMUNITION AND MAGAZINES INSIDE CITY LIMITS. >> IT TOOK GREAT COURAGE FOR THEM TO STAND UP AND SAY HARRISBURG, YOU ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING. >> WE CAN ONLY WAIT SO LONG FOR OUR LEGISLATORS TO ACT, SO WE APPLAUD THEM. REPORTER: OPPONENTS CONTINUED TO BE OUTSPOKEN AFTER THE VOTE. >> IT IS A VERY STANDARD GLOCK 19, YET IT WILL BE ILLEGAL AND I WILL BE A CRIMINAL. REPORTER: THEY TRIED TO PASS IT BEFORE, BUT IT WAS REJECTED, BUT THE RESPONSE OF THE NEW GUN LAWS SAY THAT TIMES HAVE CHANGED >> REGULAR GUN VIOLENCE THAT YOU SEE IN THE STREET -- HAVE CHANGED. >> PEOPLE HAVE CHANGED THEIR MINDS AND ARE MORE OPEN TO A FORM OF GUN CONTROL REPORTER: ONE -- GUN CONTROL. >> WHEN THEY TAKE THE LEAD TO PUSH ELECTED OFFICIALS, THAT IS WHEN THINGS GET DONE. >> THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO VOTED FOR THIS BILL BELONG IN JAIL BECAUSE THEY ARE PUTTING THE CITIZENS AT RISK. REPORT

Advertisement Pittsburgh City Council passes gun safety legislation Both sides make final arguments ahead of the contentious vote Share Shares Copy Link Copy

Mayor Bill Peduto and the Pittsburgh City Council members who sponsored the newly proposed gun legislation know that it will be legally challenged.That hasn't stopped them from moving forward, and Tuesday, City Council held a final vote on the three bills that will make a number of legal changes to gun possession in the city.Council passed the bills Tuesday morning to ban assault-style rifles. The vote was 6-3."When cities take the lead to push higher up elected officials, that's when things get done," Councilman Corey O'Connor said.In 1993, City Council passed a measure to ban assault weapons in Pittsburgh, but it was rejected by state legislators in Harrisburg. However, O'Connor said times have changed."Mass shootings and regular gun violence that you see in the streets on a daily basis have occurred, and I think people are starting to change their minds and be more open to some form of gun control," O'Connor said.To read the proposed legislation, click here and then click on "1. 2018-1218 VERSION 2." Proponents argue that the legislation improves safety in the city, while those opposed say it is simply illegal in Pennsylvania to enact such laws at the local level."No municipality can enact any gun control, and in spite of all the changes they’ve said -- changing 'ban' to 'use' -- it doesn’t matter. They legally cannot do this," said Val Finnell, a gun rights advocate from Kennedy Township who has said that private criminal complaints would be filed if the legislation passed.Council held a lengthy public hearing earlier this year that drew more than 100 speakers, most of whom were critical of the proposed legislation. However, many were not city residents."We're trying to do what we think is best for residents of Pittsburgh -- not outside of Pittsburgh, city residents," O'Connor said.However, O'Connor said the council listened closely to critics and decided to soften the bills. He said a proposed ban on military-style assault rifles has been reduced to a ban on the "use" of such weapons in public.Finnell argued that the law would impact people like him, who may live outside the city limits but who travel through Pittsburgh often.The definition of "use" is laid out as: § 1102.02 PROHIBITION ON USE OF ASSAULT WEAPONSA. It shall be unlawful to use any assault weapon in any public place within the City of Pittsburgh.B. For purposes of this Section, "public place" shall include streets, parks, open spaces, public buildings, public accommodations, businesses and other locations to which the general public has a right to resort, but does not include a private home or residence or any duly established site for the sale or transfer of firearms or for firearm training, practice or competition.C. For purposes of this Section, "use" of an assault weapon does not include possession, ownership, transportation or transfer. "Use" of an assault weapon shall include, but is not limited to:1. Discharging or attempting to discharge an assault weapon;2. Loading an assault weapon with ammunition;3. Brandishing an assault weapon;4. Displaying a loaded assault weapon;5. Pointing an assault weapon at any person; and6. Employing an assault weapon for any purpose prohibited by the laws of Pennsylvania or of the United States.D. For purposes of this Section, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that an assault weapon is loaded if fitted with a magazine.O'Connor said he believes the softening of the wording from "ban" to "use" makes the planned laws more palatable to the original critics.Finnell was not so moved."Their intent is still to regulate firearms. There's no difference," Finnell said. "They're just using semantics to try to get around the law."Finnell also criticized O'Connor directly in a Twitter posting.https://twitter.com/DrFinnell/status/1111279208637050887Finnell said he would file private criminal complaints against O'Connor, other council members and the mayor if the gun legislation passes.O'Connor said he was not worried about that threat because he believes the council is not doing anything illegal by challenging the current legal standard in court, which is where this is all expected to end up."Everybody has a right to file a complaint. We understand that," O'Connor said. "But if you actually look at the ordinances, what are we doing that’s wrong? We’re arguing something that to our knowledge, that the state has not been argued, the way we’ve written the bills."Peduto is unwavering in his support for the proposed legal changes to gun laws in Pittsburgh."I support what council is doing," Peduto said Monday, one day before the vote was held. "I think that they've taken a reasoned approach and they’ve also given time for public input and they’ve actually made changes from that input."I'm ready to sign it. I anticipate that it will pass with at least six votes tomorrow and look forward to the legal discussion that will follow."O'Connor said he does not necessarily believe that the new laws, if enacted, would stop someone like Robert Bowers, the man accused of the mass killing inside the Tree of Life Synagogue in October."I wouldn’t say that whatever we pass would have stopped anything. It's more or less, we're making a stand that that's not right and you shouldn’t be able to get your hands on certain types of weapons," O'Connor said.To read the proposed legislation for yourself, click here and then click on "1. 2018-1218 VERSION 2." City Council members tallied 6-3 in favor of the new bills during an initial vote last week. Joshua Prince, an attorney representing the Firearms Industry Consulting Group, previously said he will file suit to block the measures: "Given the City’s intent to violate Pennsylvania’s Constitution and statutory law, we are not disclosing our strategy and all the different issues we intend to raise if the proposals are enacted. As we addressed in our original letter to City Council, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Ortiz v. Commonwealth was explicitly clear that pursuant to Article 1, Section 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, “ecause the ownership of firearms is constitutionally protected, its regulation is a matter of statewide concern” and as such, "regulation of firearms is a matter of concern in all of Pennsylvania, not merely in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, and the General Assembly, not city councils, is the proper forum for the imposition of such regulation.” (emphasis added). Thus, local government may not regulate, in any manner, firearms and ammunition.Furthermore, I previously established in Firearm Owners Against Crime v. Lower Merion Township that local government may not regulate discharge of firearms. See https://blog.princelaw.com/2017/07/11/pa-supreme-court-denies-lower-merion-townships-petition-for-allocatur-involving-its-illegal-firearm-regulations/Additionally, many are unaware that the U.S. Supreme Court in D.C. v. Heller defined “bear arms” as to "wear, bear, or carry … upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose of . . . being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.” As I'm sure you’re aware, just this week, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California in Duncan v. Becerra ruled that 10 round magazine capacity bans are unconstitutional. https://www.foxnews.com/us/judge-blocks-californias-high-capacity-ammunition-ban Thus, if the City of Pittsburgh enacts these, or any other, proposals involving firearms or ammunition, at a minimum, Allegheny County Sportsmen’s League and Firearm Owners Against Crime will being (sic) filing suit, with a request for attorney fees and costs, and requesting that District Attorney Zappala file criminal charges for violations of 18 Pa.C.S. 5301, 6120.In the event the City enacts the ordinances and we file suit, all questions should be directed to me, as the Plaintiffs will not be making any statements."