Snowflakes in Hell

Another police officer killed in Philadelphia.  Apparently they already have the low lifes in custody.  I missed this one yesterday because I was busy doing things with Bitter.  Our thoughts and prayers go out of officer Liczbinki’s family.

Cop killers are a dangerous breed of criminal.  They will kill anyone as soon as look at them.  They have no regard for life.  What’s also important, most of them are actually competent shooters, which seperates them from your typical criminal.  It’s a very good thing the Philadelphia police were able to catch these guys as quickly as they did.

People are often under the mistaken impression that the Philadelphia Zoo is located at 34th and Girard.  Those of us who have been to sporting events in the city know that it’s really on South Broad Street, as this visitor from Montreal found out:

My son and I drove from Montreal to catch Monday night’s Flyers-Canadiens playoff game at the Wachovia Center. Your fans have many reasons to be proud of their city and team, but how they treat their guests at a sporting event is not one of them.

As the game progressed, the level of threats and abuse heaped on us grew at an alarming rate. At one point, an unfortunate Habs fan had a glass of beer poured on her head, and her boyfriend thought it best for them to leave the arena. By the end of the game, we and other Habs supporters needed the protection of arena security and police to exit the building.

I can’t imagine what would have happened to us if the Flyers had lost.

Welcome to the jungle.  When I attended the Flyers-Capitals game a few weeks ago at the Verizon Center in D.C. (in the VIP booth, w/ free beer and food, sweet!), I was telling Bitter the reputation our fans had.  Despite a few beers, I resisted the urge to jump up and start cracking heads when people cheered on the Capitals.  I am a poor Philadelphian.

They just don’t get it.  Or they wont get it:

But “gun fatigue” has set in, and it’s unlikely any new gun bills will be brought up in Harrisburg this legislative session.

However, this represents a moment that Nutter could use to his advantage: exploit the political goodwill he has been forging in Harrisburg to help change the conversation about guns and find solutions. Face it: If anything substantial is going to change about the city’s ability to make gun laws, it will require a civil sit-down between Nutter and state leaders - something House Speaker Dennis O’Brien, who once kept gun legislation safely tucked away in the Judiciary Committee he once chaired - told this editorial board he’s willing to do.

Nutter was smart enough to build bridges with Harrisburg before he took office. We believe he’s smart enough to spark a more productive conversation with state lawmakers, and get them to see it’s in their interest to help the city grapple with our gun problem.

We are not passing gun control laws because the City of Philadelphia can’t control it’s crime problem.  That’s off the table.  Put it out of your minds now.  It is not that we don’t care about the city’s problems, it’s that we keep telling you that you can’t fix your problem this way, especially when the city is doing little to enforce the laws they already have.  Nutter and City Council are throwing this temper tantrum because they lack the political courage to tell their constituents something they don’t want to hear; that until they get off their asses and start taking responsibility for their communities and neighborhoods, and start working with the police to get rid of the criminals, drug dealers, and gangs, nothing is going to change.  And most importantly, Philadelphians need to  elect judges who are willing to put these individuals away for a very long time when they are convicted.

We have a lot of guns in this state outside Philadelphia, and we do not have a violence problem.  The reason we don’t is that we would not tolerate it in our communities, and we’d hold the politicians and judges feet to the fire until they started dealing with it.  Really dealing with it, not pretending to deal with it.

Residents of Philadelphia are being sold a bill of goods by their politicians and by the media, that their problems have an easy solution, and it has to start with gun control.  As long as Philadelphia residents are willing to buy that line, and keep electing politicians who peddle that instead of doing something, nothing is going to change in that city.

The hearing on the Philadelphia gun control ordinances, originally scheduled for April 28th (today), has been rescheduled for May 19th, when we’ll all be in Louisville.  Apparently the city is trying to make a standing argument.

At an April 17 hearing at which Greenspan granted an order temporarily blocking enforcement of the gun-control laws, the judge said she had misgivings about the organizations’ standing to sue. Generally, organizations cannot file a constitutional challenge without showing how their members are directly harmed by the law in question.

I’m an NRA member.  I have firearms that are illegal under this law that I often transport through the City of Philadelphia.  I am affected.  I know other people who live in the city who will be affected, and are NRA members.  NRA has standing.  Why isn’t that obvious?  Or is it, and they just want NRA off the suit, and are looking for an excuse?

Someone started a petition to Impeach the Mayor of Philadelphia for passing the gun control ordinances.  I fully agree with the sentiment here, but since City Council is the body to carry out the proceedings, and they are complicit in passing the bill, I doubt this is going to go anywhere.  Also, I would advise anyone starting a petition to make sure they are using the proper spelling of the words “advice” and “break.”   I normally hate to be the spell check guy, but it kind of stood out.

Dan Pehrson, president of the PA Firearms Owners’ Association, has an editorial running in today’s Philadelphia Inquirer:

Until our elected officials learn to abide by the law, we gun owners will have to set an example. In what is only the first of many steps, gun-owner groups have filed for a temporary restraining order to prevent enforcement of the Philadelphia gun-control ordinances. Those of us who live in the city will continue to lawfully keep and bear our arms, waiting on the city to follow our lead in respecting the laws and constitution of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

Read the whole thing.  A certain pair of gun bloggers, who will hunt you down and beat you if you don’t, helped in the drafting and submission of this editorial.

It would seem the city politicians want to change the home rule charter to allow more management level positions that are exempt from civil service requirements.  I agree with Wyatt on this one, it’s a bad idea.  It means the city politicians get to give more cushy jobs to their cronies.  If you think corruption is bad now…

Christine M. Flowers at the Daily News:

Philadelphia has been ignored in Harrisburg. It does have special problems. But acting like defiant and belligerent children when we don’t get our way isn’t going to solve those problems. It’s just going to confirm what the people in northeastern and western and central Pennsylvania already think of us.

That we’re a lawless city.

Yes, it will.  Not to mention that it’s not a great idea, in a city infested with lawlessness, to have the Mayor, Police Chief, and City Council themselves flout the law so flagrantly.

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports:

Philadelphia’s latest effort to curb violence through gun control was temporarily blocked by a city judge yesterday in a ruling that both sides welcomed, and that left a National Rifle Association lawyer calling for Mayor Nutter’s arrest for “official oppression.”

Common Pleas Court Judge Jane Cutler Greenspan granted the NRA a temporary restraining order that blocks enforcement of a package of five gun-control laws passed last week by City Council and signed by Nutter.

Greenspan stressed that she was “just trying to preserve the status quo” until an April 28 hearing on whether to issue a preliminary injunction freezing the laws longer.

The only problem is, you actually have to opresss someone before you can be charged with official oppression, and the restraining order granted against enforcement will eliminate this possible route of action.  As much as I’d like to see the Mayor and City Council arrested for flouting state law, this is just posturing until they actually enforce the ordinances.

Jeff Soyer asks:

So why isn’t Nutter in jail?

It’s something I’ve been hearing a lot of, but the short answer is that the law has to be enforced before possible civil and criminal penalties come into play, and as best as I can tell, the city ordinances aren’t being enforced yet.  There’s no penalty for passing a law in violation of preemption under Pennsylvania law, so the act of merely passing a gun control ordinance is not itself illegal in the sense that you can go to jail for violating it.

Penalties don’t come in until someone attempts to enforce it.  Under our system of government, a law that is unconstitutional is essentially not law, so any arrests made under the Philadelphia gun ordinances would be done under color of law, which opens the arresting officer, and the people all the way up the chain of command, to liability under the Civil Rights Act of 1871.  The Civil Rights Act allows for state and local officials to be stripped of their immunity and to be sued as individuals, rather than in their official capacity.  For local government officials, they may be sued in both their official and personal capacities, since local governments are not considered sovereigns, don’t enjoy sovereign immunity.

There are also criminal penalties, both federal and state, which can apply, but prosecution under these statutes is rare, and when it has happened, it’s been difficult to get convictions.  In order to press criminal charges, either the local Assistant United States Attorney would have to bring charges, or the Pennsylvania Attorney General.  But as with the civil case, the law has to be enforced before there’s criminal liability.

Lynne Abraham told City Council today that she wasn’t going to enforce the City’s new gun control laws because they are unconstitutional.  Mayor Squidward (a term I have to credit to Wyatt) is trying to convince her otherwise.  No doubt the rationally self-interested Abraham doesn’t want to have to defend herself or any of her assistant DA’s against Section 1983 suits in federal court.  I can’t say I blame her.

Looks like the groundwork is being laid for a lawsuit.  As much as I might think a straightjacket is the best way to restrain the good mayor, I’ll settle for a temporary restraining order for now:

Fairfax, VA-Today in Pennsylvania court, the National Rifle Association (NRA) filed for a temporary restraining order blocking the City of Philadelphia from enforcing recently enacted gun control measures. Pennsylvania’s state preemption law maintains uniformity over a statewide system of gun laws by barring municipalities from enacting gun control laws that are more restrictive than those passed by the state legislature. NRA is joined in this effort by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and local citizens of Philadelphia.

Last week, Philadelphia’s city council passed a package of gun control bills that were clearly preempted by state law. Mayor Michael Nutter, in a brazen act of lawlessness, signed the bills. District Attorney Lynne Abraham warned the city council and mayor that their taxpayer-funded folly was unconstitutional.

“Apparently, Philadelphia politicians believe they can circumvent the will of the Pennsylvania legislature,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA’s chief lobbyist. “This is the third time the City of Philadelphia has tried to thwart state law by passing its own gun control restrictions. First it tried suing the state legislature, then it tried strong-arming the state legislature, and now it has decided to ignore state law altogether.  Despite what it seems to believe, the City of Philadelphia is not above the law.”

I’m going to bet the temporary restraining order is granted, given how the law couldn’t be more crystal clear.

In addition to the money utterly wasted persuing this illegal gun ban, where the conclusion is virtually foredrawn that the city will lose in court, gun shops are talking about moving, causing the city to lose tax revenue from shops that sell a high dollar value item:

Delia predicted panic buying of guns, but also warned that if the laws were upheld in court, “I would consider moving out of the city.”

But he wouldn’t stop selling guns to people living in Philadelphia. He said he would move his store to a more gun-friendly town across the city line and resume his business.

Not smart for a city struggling with money.

Lou Middleton, 65, a former Philadelphia police officer who was passing time in Delia’s store, called the city’s new gun laws “a bunch of b.s., to put it bluntly.”

Middleton, who lives in Northeast Philadelphia, said he collects guns, including old military firearms. “I have an M1A [rifle], which has a 20 clip, which cost me $2,000,” he said. “Are they going to come and take it?”

They might, when the enforcement period begins.  We might win in court eventually, but you’ll probably never see your rifle again.

This should give you an idea of what ordinary police officers (you know, the ones that catch criminals rather than play politician in a police uniform) think about Nutter’s latest plan.

… would be an advocate for breaking the law.

Looks like Unisys Corporation (who may or may not have once been my employer) is relocating to the City of Philadelphia from their current headquarters in Blue Bell.  I guess Unisys wants to demonstrate its leadership in the industry by doing the opposite of most technology companies, by selling the cushy campus-like HQ in the ‘burbs, and heading to the concrete jungle.  But the interesting story is that they want to plaster their name all over Liberty Two.  I have to agree this would be tacky, but you have to wonder about people who make arguments like this:

“It will ruin our city,” said Mary Tracy, who heads the nonprofit Society Created to Reduce Urban Blight

A Unisys sign is going to ruin your city?  Ummm.

Thanks again to reader ErnieD for doing the hard work finding the PDFs, but here are the passed ordinances:

1. 080018-A Prohibited Possession, Sale, Transfer of Firearms by Persons Subject to Protection from Abuse Orders

http://webapps.phila.gov/council/attachments/5080.pdf

2. 080032-A Reporting Lost or Stolen

http://webapps.phila.gov/council/attachments/5081.pdf

3. 080035-A One Gun A Month

http://webapps.phila.gov/council/attachments/5083.pdf

4. 080017 Removal of Firearms From Persons Posing Risk

http://webapps.phila.gov/council/attachments/4733.pdf

5. 080033 Assault Weapons Ban

http://webapps.phila.gov/council/attachments/4748.pdf

Several of these mirror existing federal and state laws.  Here’s my guess as to what they are planning, based on the laws they didn’t pass, and based on the ones that did.  Ortiz v. Commonwealth pretty clearly established that the city’s Home Rule Charter doesn’t allow it to override Pennsylvania Statute nor the Pennsylvania Constitution, and in this particular case, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld preemption.   But let’s look at the preemption law:

General rule. No county, municipality or township may in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammuni­tion components when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this commonwealth.

I’m guessing they are planning to argue that the laws which overlap are criminalizing firearms possession for purposes which are prohibited by “the laws of this commonwealth” and so they can regulate.  I’m also guessing they will argue the lost and stolen require doesn’t regulate any of the above, and that the one gun per month scheme also doesn’t regulate any of the above.  I think they fully expect to lose on the assault weapons deal, which was just thrown in there for media effect.

Yes, all these arguments are bogus, and I’m confident they’ll fail, but pretty clearly, I think they will have to argue something other than home rule.

At least one Philadelphia gun owner isn’t taking it lying down.  My hat is off to him.  Just a word of advice to any Philly readers who decide to defy the City’s non-law; be prepared with competent legal representation if you do get in trouble, and once you’re able to, let me know about what happened.  We can get the ball rolling on fighting this nonsense.

One tragedy this whole Philadelphia Gun Ordinance fiasco is it could be opening up the city’s police officers to lawsuits.  The real culprits are the city politicians, and the political appointees like Charles Ramsey, who carry out their edicts.  These are the people who deserve to be punished.  But our system isn’t set up to work that way, and the people most likely to end up punished are the police officers who are ordered to enforce this nonsense.

It’s easy to suggest “Well, they know it’s illegal, they should refuse to enforce it,” from the comfort of an office chair.  It’s much harder when you have mortgage payments to make and have to put the kids through school.  Qualified immunity is what it is, and preemption is clearly established law.  Ordering the enforcement of this law will likely make police officers pay for the actions of the real culprits, who will escape any punishment, which is a real tragedy in all of this.

I was listening to people talk about the Philadelphia gun bills at Indoor Silhouette tonight.  People seem to be generally pissed, and reluctant to head to the one club left in the city to shoot.  I heard several say that even if the state preempts the City’s ordinance, if charged, they will likely never see their gun again.  That’s probably correct.  The city’s “assault weapons ban” is so broad that it bans many common sporting guns.  Head there with a ported Ruger 10/22, and you can get busted.

I sincerely hope that someone sues the ever loving hell out of the City of Philadelphia for this.  But even in that instance, it’s city taxpayer money at stake, and I doubt enough of them will mind to make a difference.  This is one of those things that not much will ever be done about.  There will be no consequence for the actors involved for violating state law.  This is why it’s important for gun ownership to be viewed as a fundamental right by the federal courts.  It’s only then do you have a remedy to deal with this kind of malfeasance.

City Council has passed the gun control measures:

City Council passed five gun control measures today that are expected to still face a legal challenges.

Mayor Nutter has said he will sign the bills into law. The five bills limit handgun purchases to one a month; require lost or stolen firearms to be reported to police within 24 hours; forbid individuals under protection from abuse orders from possessing guns if ordered by the court; allow removal of firearms from “persons posing a risk of imminent personal injury” to themselves or others, as determined by a judge; and outlaw the possession and sale certain assault weapons.

I have absolutely no intention of obeying any of these city ordinances, and I can promise a lawsuit if they attempt to enforce them in violation of the laws of this commonwealth.  Get ready folks, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

UPDATE: Nutter signed the five pieces of shit, and ordered his partner in crime, Police Chief Charles Ramsey, to enforce them.  I feel for the police officers who will end up following orders, and possibly open themselves up to lawsuits.  Because of preemption, and the Ortiz precident upholding preemption, these laws passed by city council are essentially not law, so anyone enforcing them will be acting under color of law, and could possibly lose their qualified immunity.

Lynne Abraham is actually going after criminals in Phialdelphia.  This is good work from her office, and the kind of thing gun owners will support.  Now we just need judges who will be willing to send these people to prison for a while if they are convicted.  Note that one of these guys falsely reported a burglary to cover his illegal sales.  If the criminals are already reporting their firearms stolen, exactly what is this “Lost and Stolen” law going to do again?

Reader ErnieD e-mails this article talking about the vote:

A package of gun control bills submitted by City Councilman Darrell Clarke will apparently not come up for a vote tomorrow during Council’s weekly session.  Clarke last week said that the city Law Department was reviewing the proposed legislation, which was approved by Council’s Committee on Public Safety.  The legislation, which could have come up for a final vote by Council tomorrow, is being amended today and then held.

The legislation would limit handgun purchases to one a month, require owners to report lost or stolen guns to police, allow police to confiscate guns from people considered a risk to themselves or others, require a license from police to bring a gun into the city, ban semiautomatic weapons with clips that hold more than 10 rounds and establish a registry for ammunition sales.

It should take them about 3 minutes to review this legislation.  It’s illegal under state law and the state constitution.  It’s not that complicated.  I’m wondering if the city is worried about the lawsuits that are sure to come about if they cross this Rubicon.

Reader ErnieD further e-mails:

Did you check out this wording in the bills:

“The statutory limitations of municipalities to regulate the possession, sale and transfer of firearms, as upheld by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, has been duly considered and incorporated within the body of this legislation. And, we take into account the paramount interests of the public safety of the citizens of our City and Commonwealth.”

Just for reference, this is the statute they’ve duly considered:

18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6120 (a) General rule.–No county, municipality or township may in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition components when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth.

Perhaps the City Council and Mayor Nutter need to arrange a press conference where they take turns pissing on 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6120 (a), and Article I, Section 21 of the PA Constitution, for that matter, since that seems to be about the level of respect they seem to have for it.

Thanks to intrepid reader ErnieD, I have links to all nine of the Philadelphia gun control bills that were passed out of committee at city council.  Keep in mind that all of these laws are in violation of the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania:

1. Assault Weapons Ban
2. Ban on possession for mere accusation of a crime
3. License required for possession of firearms
4. Temporary removal of firearms from dangerous persons
5. Persons subject to restraining orders not to have firearms
6. Failure to report a lost or stolen firearm
7. Registration of all ammunition sales
8. Rationing of Firearms
9. Registration of all guns by LTCF holders

Some of these are extraordinarily bad, and will ban many common target guns, and guns such as the Glock 19C.  Nutter has sworn to enforce these laws.  The question is, what are we, as gun owners, going to do about it?  Write your state reps, write the state attorney general, and politely ask if there’s anything they can do about this.  Philadelphia is part of Pennsylvania, and subject to its laws and constitution, and we shouldn’t stand for this kind of treatment from corrupt big city politicians.

UPDATE: Rereading the assault weapons ban, it’s amazing how poorly worded it is.  It bans a LOT of firearm no one would consider assault weapons, and also pretty much any ammo that’s not standard FMJ.  A creative prosecutor could argue the law bans such firearms as the M1 Garand.  Even a 1903 Springfield.  The law pretty clearly bans firearms such as the Ruger Charger.

UPDATE: Rightwing prof comments:

I hate to state the obvious, but if those people are so worried about crime, they might try locking criminals up and throwing away the keys instead of patting them on the top of the head and making them community heroes.  Remember that guy this spring who held up all of those pizza places and convenience stores here? He was convicted and sentenced to 223 years, and the prosecutor is appealing the sentence because he says it should be 455 years.

Maybe our prosecutor could go to Philly and give a seminar on crime prevention.

No kidding.