Results 1 to 2 of 2
Thread: NRA sues Pittsburgh
-
June 29th, 2010, 03:09 PM #1Junior Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
- Location
-
Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania
(Allegheny County) - Posts
- 15
- Rep Power
- 0
NRA sues Pittsburgh
This case is an appeal by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and four Pittsburgh gun owners (Individual Appellants) from the decision of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, which sustained the preliminary objections of the City of Pittsburgh, its City Council, and its Mayor (collectively, City) and dismissed a declaratory judgment action seeking to invalidate a City ordinance which requires gun owners to report missing or stolen guns. The court determined that the NRA and the Individual Appellants (collectively, Appellants) lacked standing.
The ordinance in question mandates that "[n]o person who is the owner of a firearm that is lost or stolen shall fail to report the loss or theft to an appropriate local law enforcement official within twenty-four (24) hours after the discovery of the loss or theft." Pittsburgh City Code § 624.01. First-time violations are punishable by a fine of up to $500, and subsequent violations are punishable by a fine of up to $1000 and/or imprisonment of up to 90 days.
Shortly after the ordinance was adopted, Appellants filed suit seeking a declaratory judgment that the ordinance was invalid and an injunction barring its enforcement. They alleged that the ordinance was invalid on its face and an ultra vires act because it was preempted by the Uniform Firearms Act (UFA), 18 Pa. C.S. §§ 6101-6126. The UFA provides that: "No county, municipality or township may in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition components when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of this Commonwealth." 18 Pa. C.S. § 6120(a).
The complaint alleged that the Individual Appellants lived in Pittsburgh, owned guns and had valid permits to carry concealed weapons. In addition, three of the Individual Appellants alleged that they lived in areas where residential burglaries are common, and the fourth alleged that a gun belonging to him had been stolen, without specifying if the theft occurred before or after the ordinance was enacted. The City filed preliminary objections to standing and ripeness; common pleas sustained the objection to standing and dismissed the complaint. An appeal to this court followed.
More here -
http://www.leagle.com/unsecure/page....aco20100625627
-
June 29th, 2010, 08:37 PM #2
Re: NRA sues Pittsburgh
I've been waiting for the NRA to file suit again. Wonder what the courts will say this time.
I can see why the court would say the NRA lacked standing, but the individual appellants should have had standing before the court, I would think? Unless the court ruled the the individual appellants did not have standing because they were not directly affected by the ordinance, ie, none of them had a firearm lost or stolen after the ordinance went into effect? Please post any further info on this case, I'm sure that a fair amount of other members would be interested in seeing the resolution of this.
Bryan.
Similar Threads
-
Man shot by off-duty officer sues city of Pittsburgh
By HiredGoon in forum GeneralReplies: 44Last Post: November 30th, 2010, 04:59 PM -
ACLU sues DHS over unlawful TSA searches
By ChamberedRound in forum GeneralReplies: 8Last Post: November 12th, 2009, 11:55 AM -
Murderer Sues Former Hostage
By Steve_NEPhila in forum GeneralReplies: 8Last Post: October 28th, 2009, 11:05 AM -
Man sues Pittsburgh police officer over Taser attack
By HiredGoon in forum GeneralReplies: 43Last Post: February 12th, 2009, 11:03 PM -
Teacher sues to carry gun.
By mikepro8 in forum GeneralReplies: 1Last Post: October 5th, 2007, 03:49 PM
Bookmarks