The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old September 3, 2009, 12:51 PM   #1
tunakermit
Junior Member
 
Join Date: April 21, 2009
Posts: 3
Pittsburgh to outlaw 37 types of firearms for G-20

Article here.

This seems odd to me. If the intent is to secure the summit and ensure the safety of the participants, why not just create temporary high-security areas around the meeting locations? I wonder what the PA state legislature would have to say about this?
tunakermit is offline  
Old September 3, 2009, 01:40 PM   #2
Yellowfin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2007
Location: Lancaster Co, PA
Posts: 2,311
That author is a total hatemonger.
__________________
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus http://www.concealedcampus.org
"You can't stop insane people from doing insane things by passing insane laws--that's insane!" - Penn Jillette
Yellowfin is offline  
Old September 3, 2009, 01:44 PM   #3
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
It seems that this is not the only reason the Pittsburgh City Council is drawing fire. They're also trying to prohibit people from concealing their identity.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09246/995280-482.stm

Quote:
The hearing was held to get views on rules that would allow police to cite people wearing masks or carrying items from pipes to high-powered rifles if they appear intent on thwarting police dispersal orders. It became an outlet for concern about what some called the pending militarization of Downtown, and what others characterized as the demonization of protest.

"The real message that I'm hearing is that Pittsburgh welcomes the world, except those who choose to dissent and exercise their free-speech rights," said David Meiern, a veteran protester, who then donned a polar bear mask while addressing council.

"Take that off, it's illegal," quipped council President Doug Shields.
Although I'm not familiar with PA state law, other news stories on this topic suggest that it's already legal under state law to arrest people for ignoring a police dispersal order, and for a municipality to ban the open carrying of firearms by civilians in an "emergency". Therefore, the proposed ordinances are mere window dressing. I know nothing of Pittsburgh city politics, but this strikes me as blatant political posturing.

Do the councilmembers not realize that by throwing the 1st and 2nd Amendments into the wind, they are baiting people into starting more protests?

I am truly dumbfounded.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Old September 3, 2009, 11:32 PM   #4
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,903
It is clear you do not appreciate good mediocre political theater.
gc70 is offline  
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.03892 seconds with 10 queries