Wolf says he'll veto moves to supersede local gun ordinances in Pennsylvania
Gov. Tom Wolf said he will veto NRA-backed legislation advanced Tuesday in the state Legislature that would give legal standing to individuals and organizations to sue municipalities over local firearms ordinances and seek damages.
The House and Senate moved forward with competing proposals. The Senate sent its bill to the House after a handful of amendments were defeated. In the House, dozens of Democrats joined Republicans to defeat several amendments. The House can take up its plan as early as Wednesday.
Wolf, a Democrat, said he doesn't believe the state should restrict a local government's ability to pass gun regulations, including keeping track of lost and stolen guns.
The two bills would override local ordinances regarding ownership, possession, transfer or transportation, ammunition or ammunition components in conflict with state law.
The legislation is backed by the National Rifle Association and opposed by gun-control advocates. A handful of municipalities have passed firearms-related ordinances, including Pittsburgh, and some mayors have called the legislation “punitive.”
Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto, while a city councilman, in 2008 sponsored a city ordinance requiring owners to report lost or stolen handguns to police.
In 2014, a similar proposal was signed into law. But the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional because it was amended into unrelated legislation in violation of a state constitutional provision. The ruling did not address the substance of the bill.
Kevin Zwick is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-850-2856, firstname.lastname@example.org or on Twitter @kevinjzwick.
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.