by Allegheny County Sportsman's League
http://www.nauticom.net/www/acsl/
acsl@nauticom.net
I have told many people if you want to see how gun
rights will survive if we get a Republican Administration
and keep a Republican controlled Congress all that one needs
to do is watch what has, and is, happening in Pennsylvania.
In addition to the horrible mess as a result of Penn-
sylvania Act 17 passing in 1995 last December, NRA staffers
approved a ban on gun manufacturers lawsuits that we told
them would not ban lawsuits before Philadelphia recently
sued gun manufacturers, a gun safety amendment that turned
into a ban on the sale of handguns that are sold without
trigger locks, a mandatory trigger lock usage with liability
penalties if handgun owners who do not keep trigger locks on
their handguns, and most recently, after pressure by pro-gun
lawmakers, the Pennsylvania State Police admitted that they
are maintaining a record of all handgun sales (read regis-
tration) in spite of the fact that it supposedly prohibited
under state law, and they will continue to do so in spite of
the law.
Of corse Governor Ridge's office had no comment, maybe
because he is proud of the fact that he has computerized
over 8 million of those handgun records and he is still
counting. But do not fear, E.D.ILA Jim Baker told us that
none of this would happen on his watch. Just like the as-
sault weapons ban, and the Brady law did not happen on his
watch.
ILA staffers in Pennsylvania believe it is more import-
ant pleasing the Governor and Republican leadership than
protecting gun owners rights.
Last December, the Pennsylvania General Assembly sup-
ported amendments to a Senate bill amending anti-stalking
and harassment legislation. These amendments were to exempt
gun manufacturers from lawsuits, provide for checking fire-
arms in a court facility, making the possession of a firearm
illegal if it's serial numbers were altered, changed, re-
moved or obliterated, and mandating the prohibition on the
sale or transfer of all handguns unless the dealer
provides/sells a locking device, to the purchaser, for the
firearm or the design of the firearm incorporates a locking
device.
The Allegheny County Sportsmen's League argued that the
language in the bill to prohibit gun manufacturer lawsuits
would, in fact, allow them because the language added a
loophole to the bill. We also argued against the mandatory
sale of handgun locking devices because it would place
unnecessary liability on the owners of such firearms, and
there was no proof that such devices are effective in reduc-
ing illegal access to firearms. Failing to draw NRA's
attention to our concerns about the legislation we asked
members of the legislature to vote no on the bill.
The NRA fought hard for passage of the legislation even
though it contains the mandatory handgun locking devices
language. In a letter to both Houses NRA state liaison John
Hohenwarter wrote: "Another provision provides that licensed
firearm dealers must provide a "trigger locking device" with
the sale of any firearm as defined in section 6102 of Title
18, the Uniform Firearms Act. NRA would have preferred this
provision to require only that licensed dealers make trig-
ger-locking devices available for sale to firearm purchas-
ers. Nevertheless, because of the importance of the other
provisions to law abiding gun owners and to the public, NRA
asks that you support the omnibus legislation in order to
ensure their enactment."
In response to the ACSL's request for a No vote on the
bill, Hohenwarter sent a memo to the full house of represen-
tatives, which was hand carried by Act 17 sponsor Rep.
Robert Godshall that read: "It has been brought to our
attention that one or more local sportsman's groups or
individuals from the western part of the Commonwealth are
asking for a "no" vote on SB 167. These groups or individu-
als do not represent the NRA. Their position is not the NRA
position."
Thus the NRA position achieved the following legisla-
tive result:
1. Liability on the gun owner for not using trigger locks
even if gun is stolen.
2. The law contains no grandfather clause for previously
purchased handguns
3. The law is so broad that it even covers antique guns
4. A law that does not stop gun manufacturer lawsuits
5. Further alienation of the grassroots activists
Shortly after passage of the bill and the signing of it
into law by Gov. Tom Ridge, the city of Philadelphia filed
suit against the gun industry.
Recently, we acquired the transcripts of the floor
debates on the amendments. As you know, legislative intent
is very important to understand just what a particular piece
of legislation is designed to do. It is used many times to
guide court decisions and to draft regulations. A very
alarming exchange occurred between the maker of the locking
device amendment, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Repub-
lican Thomas Gannon, and anti-gun Democrat Andrew Carn:
The SPEAKER pro tempore: On the amendment, the Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from Philadelphia, Mr. Carn.
Mr. CARN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the maker of the
amendment stand for interrogation, please?
The SPEAKER pro tempore: The gentleman, Mr. Gannon, indi-
cates that he is willing to stand for interrogation.
You may proceed.
Mr. CARN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Under this amendment, if
someone is properly utilizing a trigger lock and that
gun is subsequently taken and used in a crime, is the
owner of that gun exempt from being sued? What is his
liability?
Mr. GANNON: Mr. Speaker, I would have to say that, in my
view, the owner would not be exempt from a lawsuit, but
I do not believe the owner would be held liable if he
was exercising prudent and reasonable care in use of
the trigger lock. If a case or a lawsuit was filed
against the owner on a theory of negligence, I do not
believe the owner would be negligent and therefore
responsible.
Mr. CARN: But is there any language that exempts the owner
from liability under those conditions?
Mr. GANNON: There is not any language that would exempt the
owner, but certainly in a court, that would be a de-
fense to any claim, and I believe that it would be an
absolute defense if the owner established that he was
using a trigger lock and was exercising the care re-
quired.
Mr. CARN. Mr. Speaker, what does your amendment say as it
relates to antique guns? Do owners of antique guns have
to also have trigger locks for their antique guns?
Mr. GANNON: No, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. CARN: Where is that language that states that, Mr.Speak-
er?
Mr. GANNON: Only if the person is purchasing an antique gun
from a dealer, that would require a trigger lock.
Mr. CARN. I was looking for language to that effect. Do
you know- Could you point it out to me, please?
Mr. GANNON: Yes. The rule, as set out in the amendment, is
that when a licensee transfers a handgun, it has to
have a trigger lock, so it does not matter whether or
not it was an antique weapon or not. It requires it.
Mr. CARN. So you are saying that all antique weapons, under
this amendment, would also, under this law, if this
became law, would be required to have a locking device?
Mr. GANNON: Antique weapons would not be exempt.
Mr. CARN. Okay. Thank you. Another question, please: What
happens if someone goes into a dealer shop to purchase
a gun and at that particular time the dealer does not
have safety locks to sell? Is that dealer, if this was
law, able to sell that gun at that time?
Mr. GANNON: No.
Mr. CARN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. GANNON: Mr. Speaker, if I may, I want to make it clear,
because there was some confusion, this amendment, this
trigger locking device, only applies to handguns, not
to long guns or rifles. I think you are aware of that,
but I wanted to make it clear on the record.
Mr. CARN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have
finished my interrogation and would like to speak on
the amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore: The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. CARN. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
"First, I would like to thank this House for taking
this time to debate what I consider to be a very serious
issue in Pennsylvania, the access of handguns, and I am
concerned that when we take action such as to require trig-
ger locks, I think we need to offer an incentive such as
exemption from liability to those who comply with our laws.
I have an amendment that hopefully, when we go further, we
will get a chance to consider that. Also, I think that it
is important because of the tremendous number of antique
guns that exist in this State that are not being used or not
fired, that they should also have an exemption, since they
are not necessarily a threat and hopefully through a future
amendment we can address that. Also, I am concerned that
dealers, if this became law, if they run out of trigger
locks, I am concerned that they still might sell this gun
and be in violation of the law, and I think that is an issue
that we need to address. Now, one of the other concerns
that bothered me with this particular amendment is that it
does not exempt law enforcement officers, and I think that
is a provision that we need to include in any law, because
there are many law enforcement officers who need their guns
or need their handguns in a moment's notice, and I think we
need to be clear in that they have the opportunity to be
exempt from such a trigger lock provision. And for that
reason I am hoping that we shall consider a future amendment
that would address these concerns as well. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
As you can see, the current NRA leadership is not
concerned with winning, just the perception of winning.
Unfortunately, the losers here will be average gun owners
who unintentionally cross paths with a 'winning' system
designed to crush them without any regard to criminal int-
ent.
Remember the words of James J. Baker in Charlotte,
"Not on my watch". Well, it's time to check the watch Jim!
By the way, has anyone forgotten the instant check system?
That was on Baker's watch too. PA gun owners cannot stand
too many more of these types of victories.
Just recently, Pennsylvania state Representative Daryl
Metcalfe and 20 other pro-gun legislators sent a letter to
the Commissioner of the Pennsylvania state police asking
whether the state police is keeping records of handgun sales
in violation of state law. Instead of sending their re-
sponse to Metcalfe they sent the Metcalfe letter to a re-
porter on the anti-gun Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. The Post-
Gazette questioned Governor Tom Ridge's office about the
letter, but they had no response. Maybe that is because
Gov. Tom Ridge is proud of the fact that he has computer-
ized 8 million of those record of sales.
The state police, according to the Post-Gazette, ac-
knowledged that the law requires them to destroy the records
of a background check, but they denied that keeping the
record of sale as being a registry of firearm owners. NRA
Staffers in Pennsylvania have supported the State Police's
position and will not move to stop the registry.
We can not let Al Gore capture the Presidency. But if
George Bush picks Tom Ridge for Vice President, we will have
to keep a close watch on our gun rights under that Adminis-
tration.
PLEASE FORWARD FAR AND WIDE!
The Allegheny County Sportsmen's League is another one
of the growing number of groups who prize the Second Amend-
ment above the NRA, and thus they have the full support of
KeepAndBearArms.com. If you are not yet aware of the NRA's
gun control measures, perhaps it is time you learn what they
are doing against freedom in this country. Start by inves-
tigating why there are gun rights leaders from around the
nation standing against the NRA's loud call for the enforce-
ment for 20,000+ unconstitutional gun laws through our
Project Exile Condemnation Coalition. Please use our auto-
emailers to reach your entire state legislatures to make
your voice heard. And for God's sake please VOTE on elec-
tion day! ~~ KABA
