"Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto was joined by Gov. Tom Wolf, members of City Council and state Democratic lawmakers Friday in proposing legislation that would ban semiautomatic rifles and certain ammunition and firearms accessories within city limits." https://triblive.com/local/alleghen...ty-measures-would-include-assault-weapons-ban "Defying sharp warnings from gun rights groups, Los Angeles thrust itself into the national debate over gun control Tuesday, as city lawmakers voted unanimously to ban the possession of firearm magazines that hold more than 10 rounds." https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-ammunition-magazines-20150728-story.html
“They admitted it would be an uphill fight in Pennsylvania’s Republican-controlled Legislature, which has stymied efforts by Democrats to enact stiffer gun laws, but noted GOP lawmakers in October supported passage of the first firearms regulation in more than a decade.”
You know where this is going..... So considering the 10th and 2nd Amendments, how is it that states can pass any regulations with regard to arms? Shouldn't all laws involving arms/guns be made at the Federal level?
The commerce clause allows regulation for gun sales. Also under the doctrine of compelling interest the federal government can restrict any right.
Oh wait you are talking about states here. States can pass any law they want and if the federal government does not challenge it then it stands
Perhaps, they also seem to believe that governors run cities. This might help: American Government 101: From the Continental Congress to the Iowa Caucus, Everything You Need to Know About US Politics (Adams 101) Hardcover– September 16, 2016 by Kathleen Sears (Author)
I already pointed out to Rucker that the gun ban proposed by the mayor of Pittsburgh needs to pass through the Repub state legislature. In other words...city council and city mayors can’t just create and pass any law they want.
No, it doesn't need to pass through the state legislature. It's a city ordinance. However, the state preemption clause would prevent it from being passed by the state Supreme Court. The necessary change to the state preemption law is the uphill battle referred to: "Kim Stolfer, president of the statewide group Firearm Owners Against Crime, cited a state law prohibiting counties and municipalities from regulating “the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition components when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited” in Pennsylvania. Stolfer said the group would sue the city if it enacts the bills. “What the city is doing is criminal,” he said. “There’s going to be more than one lawsuit. We’re also going to be pursuing criminal charges against the mayor and council for intentionally violating the law.” Wolf, along with Democratic state Sens. Jay Costa of Forest Hills, Wayne Fontana of Brookline and state Rep. Dan Frankel of Squirrel Hill vowed to support legislation proposed by Frankel that would abolish the the law cited by Stolfer. Pittsburgh for more than a decade has been prevented from enforcing an ordinance requiring the reporting of lost or stolen handguns because of the preemption. They admitted it would be an uphill fight in Pennsylvania’s Republican-controlled Legislature, which has stymied efforts by Democrats to enact stiffer gun laws, but noted GOP lawmakers in October supported passage of the first firearms regulation in more than a decade. The law requires domestic abusers to turn in guns within 24 hours of a conviction." Illinois has no state preemption law, and the village of Highland Park passed an "assault weapons ban", making it illegal to possess an "assault weapon" or "high capacity magazine" within city limits, with no grandfathering. The ordinance "...gave anyone who legally possessed “an Assault Weapon or Large Capacity Magazine” 60 days to move these items outside city limits, disable them, or surrender them for destruction. §136.020, id., at 73a. Anyone who violates the ordinance can be imprisoned for up to six months, fined up to $1,000, or both. §136.999, id., at 74a" This ordinance was upheld by the 7th Circuit Court of appeals, in part because "the ordinance “may increase the public’s sense of safety,” which alone is “a substantial benefit.” https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/15-133
I’m just going by the link you provided earlier... “They admitted it would be an uphill fight in Pennsylvania’s Republican-controlled Legislature, which has stymied efforts by Democrats to enact stiffer gun laws, but noted GOP lawmakers in October supported passage of the first firearms regulation in more than a decade.”
That's where I pulled the larger quote from. Go back and reread it. The uphill fight is to overturn preemption.
The article mentions how Pittsburg has been prevented from enforcing an ordinance requiring the reporting of lost or stolen firearms. If city councils and city mayors can implement any laws then how have they been prevented from implementing such?
Some states have preemption laws, some do not. Illinois does not, hence Friedman v Highland Park. Are you being deliberately obtuse? This has already been pointed out. Also of note is that even with laws preventing them from doing so Democratic lawmakers in state with preemption still try to pass gun control. The People's Republic of Boulder did so recently. In some states criminal charges can be pressed against lawmakers who do so.
Just pointing out that city councils and city mayors can’t always just pass whatever they want as pointed out in previous post.
