House panel shoots down Rendell's gun control bills
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07324/835397-100.stm
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
By Tom Barnes, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
HARRISBURG -- Gov. Ed Rendell suffered a stinging political defeat today as a House committee defeated two gun control bills he had wanted and tabled a third.
The Judiciary Committee did give overwhelming approval to a fourth bill, but it wasn't controversial. It calls for a mandatory 20-year jail sentence for anyone convicted of intentionally shooting at a police officer, even if the officer isn't hit.
In what longtime Capitol observers said was an unprecedented action, Mr. Rendell testified for 40 minutes before the Judiciary Committee and, in an emotional voice, strongly urged them to send all the bills to the House floor so the public would know where all 203 House members stood.
One would limit gun buyers to purchasing just one handgun a month. It was defeated 17 to 12. Another bill would have allowed towns and cities to enact their own gun laws, even if they were tougher than state law. (Currently only the Legislature can enact guns laws, to avoid what gun owners call a "confusing patchwork'' of laws from town to town). That bill was defeated 19 to 10.
The committee tabled a measure that would have required gun owners to report to police immediately any gun that was lost or stolen. Owners could face fines or even jail time if they failed to do so. Mr. Rendell said such a reporting requirement would go a long way toward stopping "straw purchasers,'' people without a police record who are paid money by criminals to buy guns for them.
Technically, tabling the bill keeps it alive. Rep. Dan Frankel, D-Squirrel Hill, who supported all the bills, said there was some concern among some members that a law-abiding gun owner could face jail time if he or she unintentionally misplaced a gun or failed to report a lost weapon to police. He said the bill may be amended and brought up for a vote sometime later.
Rep. Ron Marsico, R-Dauphin, who opposed the bills, called them "feel-good pieces of legislation'' that wouldn't really stop crime.