« The Liberal-Conservative War | Main | The corrupting influence of cellphones and the internet »

Pennsylvania Democrat Declares "who really cares about it being unconstitutional?"

We're in deep trouble, folks, when people with this woman's mindset have control of our government. She has let us know exactly what she thinks about our Constitution, and she has no problem publicly spitting on it.

Pittsburgh City Council gave its first approval today to legislation requiring that anyone report a lost or stolen firearm report that within 24 hours or potentially face a $500 fine.

The 6-1 vote, with two abstentions, sets up a final vote likely next week, which would send the legislation to Mayor Luke Ravenstahl for his signature or veto, and then potentially to the courts, where similar measures have been challenged.

"Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?" said Councilwoman Tonya Payne, a supporter. "This is what's right to do, and if this means that we have to go out and have a court battle, then that's fine ... We have plenty of dead bodies coming up in our streets every single day, and that is unacceptable."

The lone no vote was by Councilman Ricky Burgess, who argued that it would be a "false cure" that would be "particularly cruel" to his violence-plagued northeastern Pittsburgh district.

Rather than working within the bounds of the law and their constituents' civil rights, Ms. Payne thinks she can just ignore them at will. Who cares about this thing called the Constitution of the United States. She thinks she should be able to pass whatever laws she wants whenever she wants. As far as she's concerned, her good intentions are all that matter, the Constitution be damned.

This is just the beginning. You'll see a lot more of these above-the-law, Constitution-be-damned liberals coming out and showing their true colors, especially after Barack Obama is inaugurated.

Warner Todd Huston at STACLU was first to report on this. He is spot on with this:

Democrats do not see the Constitution as a limit on their actions. In fact, Democrats don't see any rules or laws as limits on what they think they can do. They imagine that they can do anything they want no matter what the law says. Democrats are essentially lawless creatures.

After Ted Strickland's wrist slap of Joe the Plumber's illegal snoopers, I have to agree with him.

If you feel like letting Ms. Payne know how you feel, you can find her contact information here.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/33167.

Comments (28)

Excellent post. Very frigh... (Below threshold)

Excellent post. Very frightening to see how little liberals care about the rule of law.
http://rightklik.blogspot.com/

Does this mean that crimina... (Below threshold)
John F Not Kerry:

Does this mean that criminals with guns will have to report lost or stolen guns too? I'm sure they wouldn't have any problems with that.

In all likelihood, Ms. Payn... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:

In all likelihood, Ms. Payne's brave stance just prevented another Columbine.

In all likelihood, Ms. P... (Below threshold)
Clay:

In all likelihood, Ms. Payne's brave stance just prevented another Columbine.

Possibly. Or she may have prevented a scenario like this:
http://www.azstarnet.com/metro/227450

Like it or not, the 2nd amendment guarantees our right to life. This means guaranteeing the ability to defend ourselves and our families in just such circumstances.

Like it or not.

One of my wifes high school... (Below threshold)
glenn:

One of my wifes high school chums is a real loon politically and when it's pointed out to her that some of the things she thinks the gov't ought to do are unconstitutional she makes that little tongue cluck the French use when something displeases them. She really doesn't like it when I remind her that after we abandon the rule of law she won't have anyplace to hide when I and all my right wing facist friends come calling.

Ahhh yes and who can forget... (Below threshold)
Pretzel Logic:

Ahhh yes and who can forget this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqjFBiPMmBE

We're in deep trouble, f... (Below threshold)
Brian:

We're in deep trouble, folks, when people with this woman's mindset have control of our government. She has let us know exactly what she thinks about our Constitution, and she has no problem publicly spitting on it.

I'm glad you're finally realizing how harmful the last 8 years have been.

At least she didn't call th... (Below threshold)
Allen:

At least she didn't call the constitution a "god**mn piece of paper like President Bush did. Not that their is any difference, right?

Just another one of those c... (Below threshold)
bill-tb:

Just another one of those chocolate cities like New Orleans.

In all likelihood,... (Below threshold)
In all likelihood, Ms. Payne's brave stance just prevented another Columbine.

So if the need is great enough, or the cause righteous enough, we shouldn't worry about the constitution? Good to know!

Here's factcheck.org on Bus... (Below threshold)
martyredcars:

Here's factcheck.org on Bush and the "piece of paper":

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_president_bush_call_the_constitution_a.html

Allen, try writing on Blue ... (Below threshold)
Mike:

Allen, try writing on Blue where half-truths and unsubstantiated facts are treated as reality.

You know, I really get a ki... (Below threshold)
John F Not Kerry:

You know, I really get a kick out of the comment voting system here on Wizbang. I especially love to see that trolls try their best to vote down views that represent the majority opinion. I find it even funnier that Wizbang Blue has no voting system in their comments. Of course, that could be because people rarely read the Blue posts, other than other Blue sympathizers.

I guess that would be the s... (Below threshold)
Allen:

I guess that would be the same as Mickey Mouse voted in the election, right? Didn't that come from the right side?

Just like "Mission Accomplished, bring em on, looking under his desk for WMD's" all that came from the left, or right?

When the city finds itself ... (Below threshold)
Gmac:

When the city finds itself in a lawsuit filed against the legislation and then they loose due to the unconstitutionality or violation of state law the taxpayers are going to be a bit miffed that it was money wasted.

Allen -- Your point is, wha... (Below threshold)
martyredcars:

Allen -- Your point is, what? Two wrongs make a right?

KimWhy dont you us... (Below threshold)
James:

Kim

Why dont you use a bit of common sense once in a while. THe constitution is not the Gospel, it may be the cornerstone of the democracy and at times it will have to be challenged.

The loss of a firearm is one of those commonsense situations when, logic dictates that that the authorities be informed immediately.

As a gun owner and hunter, I think every gun owner should have to inform the authorities of a firearm loss or theft, regardless as to whether it is constitutionally obliged or not.

"KimWhy dont you u... (Below threshold)
Kevin:

"Kim

Why dont you use a bit of common sense once in a while. THe constitution is not the Gospel, it may be the cornerstone of the democracy and at times it will have to be challenged.

The loss of a firearm is one of those commonsense situations when, logic dictates that that the authorities be informed immediately.

As a gun owner and hunter, I think every gun owner should have to inform the authorities of a firearm loss or theft, regardless as to whether it is constitutionally obliged or not."

James,

Do you HAVE to report your car stolen to the police? Do you HAVE to report a knife stolen to the police. The Idea of requiring you to report a theft of loss of personal property for fear of a civilly liable penalty is insane. I don't care if it's a gun or not, you are more likely to be killed by your own car than your own gun.

It's your type of thinking that has this country in pathetic shape. You think it's common sense to have a random law about reporting one type of item lost or stolen to the police? It's you're property, and that should be done at your discretion. You can be arrested for assault with a deadly weapon for using a bat as easily as a gun, should we report all bats lost to the police too? Get a clue!

I love the double standard ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

I love the double standard here. When a city councilwoman supports a local proposal that could be construed as unConstitutional, there is OUTRAGE!
When the President suspends Habeus Corpus and declares the right to detain "enemy combatants" (designated so by him alone) indefinitely without charges; when he signs a law passed by Congress, then issues a "signing statement" making it clear he will not enforce the law he just signed; when he declares the FISA law "inadequate" and unilaterally abrogates it;when he fires career civil servants and replaces them with partisan hacks in order to prosecute political enemies; when the President does all those things, there is silence on the Right. Either silence, or a bunch of pathetic excuses and twisted legal logic.

What would reporting a stol... (Below threshold)
hermie:

What would reporting a stolen gun actually accomplish regarding gang shootings?

Would the gangbanger be MORE afraid of shooting someone if he was in the possession of gun he stole, versus one he purchased from his local drug dealer?

This penalizes the legitimate gun owner, and it's intent is to make people afraid of owning a gun because they may have it stolen, and they would be punished if they didn't report it.

Would the police put an APB for the stolen gun? Would they be required to do anything different than they would as if it was a stolen car, a stolen tv, a stolen knife?

Hey Bruce. We're not talkin... (Below threshold)
Clay:

Hey Bruce. We're not talking about the suspension of Habeus Corpus, Gitmo detainees, or FISA. How in the hell do you know what we individually thought of those issues anyway? We're talking about a dumbass councilwoman who thinks she can toss the Constitution in the can. Stick to the topic or sit it out.

It isn't clear from the new... (Below threshold)
Important Point:

It isn't clear from the news reports, but she's talking about the Pennsylvania Constitution, not the federal one. Pennsylvania's state courts have long held that the Pennsylvania constitution prohibits municipalities from enacting their own gun laws because such laws are of statewide concern. See this post at Volokh.
http://volokh.com/posts/1222457153.shtml

Thank you Important Point, ... (Below threshold)
abc:

Thank you Important Point, you are correct. They were talking about the state constitution, which regulates guns and prohibits local rules. The law passed in Pittsburgh is in a gray area, in that the state law regulates issuance and use of firearms, but is silent as to the disposition of the firearms after purchase. I still think it's a little draconian, and unlikely to be enforced much.

How about a little less knee jerk bashing, and a little more reading of the article being complained about. Overreactions to misunderstandings "because they are Democrats" undermines your credibility and weakens conservatives as a whole. Both parties have enough weaknesses without manufacturing false ones. I guess with Jay T's departure you guys are under pressure to produce more. Please don't let that come at the expense of quality.

Ashley Todd. ... (Below threshold)
max:

Ashley Todd.

I'm sorry, Clay, I didn't r... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

I'm sorry, Clay, I didn't realize that commenting here meant being part of an echo chamber. It was my silly notion that a discussion could start at point A and go to point B if the participants wished. I didn't realize that your idea of a discussion was, "Boy, she's stupid" "No, she's not" ad infinitum.
I'll be real good from now on.

KevinI am for libe... (Below threshold)
James:

Kevin

I am for liberal gun laws; I live in Switzerland where the guns laws are very liberal.

A gun is unlike many other of the objects that you have described, in that it is ostensibly used to shoot something, either a living creature or a target. As such, a license is required to own it, in pretty much every country in the world as it considered to be a restricted item. The loss or theft of such an item should be mandatory, as it means that the authorities have been informed; I consider gun theft to be a fairly serious crime.

Now I suggest that you check with your insurance company as to the need for informing the police of the theft of your automobile. I think you will find that, should you look to claim on your insurance, a police report will be needed.

Your analogy is wrong, ill conceived and like your point of view, completely lacking in commonsense. I keep my guns in a safe, firmly under lock and key, not that I am required to do so. But even here in good old Switzerland, it is obligatory to inform the police of a firearm's theft. Your libertarian view of the law, is fine for Utopia, but then in Utopia, your gun would not be stolen and in an ideal world, nothing would get mislaid.

Again, your child like analogy of a bat, vis a vis a gun is completely ludicrous. I suggest you wise up and accept that there is a vast difference between a gun and any other object, even a knife. It is people like you with your crackpot ideas whom are giving legitimate gun owners a bad name. The world is anti gun enough, but reducing a gun to just being another item, or a possession will prove counter productive.

I suggest that you should get a grip, starting with reality!

abc - I mostly agree with y... (Below threshold)
Important Point:

abc - I mostly agree with you but I also think republicans wouldn't be so quick to pass local laws that ignore the state constitution.

I believe the founder's 2nd... (Below threshold)
kirkrr:

I believe the founder's 2nd amendment intent, as evidenced by Jefferson's writings, was to make sure the citizenry was never placed in a position where an oppressive government had no fear of being deposed, when no other means were available, through armed revolt. It is the balance of power thing - not that it would ever be used, but if the option never existed, then a dictatorial government could reign unchecked. We'd have to get our guns from t criminals, as, by definition, they do not follow the law anyway.

Even more fundamental to the argument, however, is this: the legal system ENFORCES laws, they do not protect preemptively, except through the deterrent factor. Police are NOT bodyguards, they only act AFTER the crime has been committed. Gun ownership is a self-defense - bodyguard - tactic. It aids to prevent the crime. Before the crime, as a deterrent factor (knowing that Colorado legally allows defense of person, family, or property with up to and including deadly force, has decreased crime substantially. It is easier to prey on unarmed victims in adjacent states, knowing there is less chance of harm befalling the criminal), as well as during the commission of a crime where the armed victim can produce significant defensive capabilities.

The statistics on gun deaths outside of the commission of a crime are similar to death by lightning or bee stings. The use of legal, registered firearms in the commission of a crime are equally miniscule. From these statistics, it is apparent that gun laws are working perfectly. Quoting criminal acts as a basis for additional gun control laws is based on illogical arguments that have no supporting basis in fact but have significant supporting facts against. Reviewing the countries that have banned personal gun ownership have uniformly shown an increase of crime, and an increase of death by firearms. Apparently the criminals did not get the memo......

If you want to report a theft, you should - but you are under NO legal obligation to do so. If you want to collect the insurance on your stolen car, then I would guess you would WANT to report the theft. It is your FREEDOM OF CHOICE.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy