ShareThis Page
Pennsylvania gun violence activists set sights on new bill |

Pennsylvania gun violence activists set sights on new bill

Associated Press
Supporters applaud after the Pittsburgh city council voted 6-3 to pass gun-control legislation in the Pittsburgh City Council meeting, Tuesday, April 2, 2019, in Pittsburgh. The bill was introduced in the wake of the synagogue massacre last October. The legislation places restrictions on military-style assault weapons like the AR-15 rifle that authorities say was used in the attack that killed 11 and wounded seven.

HARRISBURG — Fresh from a victory in Pennsylvania last fall, anti-gun violence advocates are turning their attention to legislation to empower family members or police to seek the immediate, if temporary, seizure of someone’s firearms.

Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America went to the state Capitol on Monday to press the case for the bill, sometimes called a “red flag” bill in other states.

Under it, someone who is deemed to represent a danger of suicide or a serious threat to another person could be the subject of an “extreme risk protection order.”

Judges who are petitioned by police or a family member could consider a person’s threats or attempts at suicide or violence; domestic abuse; excessive use of drugs or alcohol; the recent acquisition of a firearm; or a couple other factors.

Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, supports the legislation, and backers of the bills — primarily Democratic lawmakers and Republicans from suburban Philadelphia — say such a rule could help prevent suicides, school shootings and other instances of gun violence.

A rally Monday drew Robert Schentrup, whose sister was a victim of last year’s mass school shooting in Parkland, Fla., and Julia Spoor, a 17-year-old Jenkintown resident who helped launch Students Demand Action after her father committed suicide.

Speaking at the rally, Spoor warned lawmakers aligned with the National Rifle Association that she will turn 18 — voting age — soon, and so will millions of others like her.

“Us meddling kids will finally have the right to take control of our own lives, and if lawmakers are scared by that, they should be,” she said.

Fourteen other states have similar laws, said an affiliate group, Everytown for Gun Safety.

The bill’s future is uncertain in a Republican-controlled Legislature historically protective of gun rights. The NRA did not immediately offer its assessment of the legislation Monday, although it had opposed an earlier version last year, saying “it would allow the seizure of firearms with little or no access to due process.”

Another gun-rights organization, Firearms Owners Against Crime, said in a flyer that extreme risk protection orders “are probably the single biggest legislative and constitutional threat” to gun ownership rights. It also warned that it will not stop someone from committing violence and would force people to sue to get their guns back.

Bills in the House and Senate remain in committee, but backers are hopeful of hearings and the potential for votes in the summer or fall.

The coming debate over extreme risk protection orders follows last fall’s passage of the first anti-violence legislation in more than a decade that deals directly with firearms, after years of lobbying by violence-prevention groups.

That law forces people in Pennsylvania with a domestic violence ruling against them to more quickly surrender their guns. Advocates said the Parkland shooting, which killed 17 people, and the pervasiveness of the #MeToo movement helped propel its passage.

“We’re going to approach this in the same way,” Sen. Tom Killion, R-Delaware, said Monday. “It’s not an anti-gun owner bill.”

Aside from a domestic violence-related order, backers of extreme risk protection orders say Pennsylvania law provides only one other avenue to take firearms away from someone deemed to be a danger.

That avenue, an involuntary commitment, is unusually extreme because it often means a 30-day inpatient stay and the permanent loss of the right to own a firearm, they say.

Categories: News | Pennsylvania | Top Stories
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.