The Official Philadelphia Gun Rights March - Saturday, May 25th, 2013

[ocp]

I'm going to assume they were talking about https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=1&theater

He had an AK. I carried my AR-15 pistol so it could have been me. I didn't see anything else but handguns.

[inrem]

If someone had a true M16, why would they turn it into a legal pistol? I would not consider an AR15 with an auto sear to be an M16.

Possible, but unlikely. If had to guess though, the probability that the pistol was full auto would be be 0.01%.

[edit -did not see your post above when I made my post - I only saw 1 AR type at the Love Park portion of the event, and I guess it was you]

Also, I fail to see how a reporter could look at the crowd of gun rights people at Love Park and think that it was "a few dozen" - I view a "few dozen" as meaning 3-4 dozen.

I would guess that we were closer to 100 at Love Park, and obviously the crowd was several times larger by Independence Hall. Perhaps 500 by 1PM.

[Kchristy]

Just wanted to sy again how nice it was to meet you guys. Was especially nice to see a few families there.

[RebelRaider5]

Anyone gonna upload more pics? I forgot my camera and know a few people were taking pics. I know Al took a bunch.

[BB62]

So, did Philadelphia repeal their ordinance? Any legal action?

Thank you.

[Curmudgeon]

So, did Philadelphia repeal their ordinance? Any legal action?

Thank you.

As far as I know, their illegal ordinance is still on the books. It gives them political "points" to say that, even if they never use it. We were told prior to our rally that the Philly DA's office knew the ordinance was illegal and unenforceable, and that they had NO intention of enforcing it, but that statement might not be worth the paper it wasn't even written on (it was conveyed via phone conversation). I don't believe any legal action is possible until someone has standing, and a person won't have standing unless charged, and they refuse to charge, which makes it legally impossible to oppose. Devious, aren't they?

Some silly cop/DA could always attempt to enforce it, leaving it up to you to suffer the cost of fighting it, and you could probably count on a lot of support from our community if that happened. Slapping back at Philly would be a worthwhile endeavor for many of us!

I was there for that rally. Not only were we not hassled, we even had a police escort as we marched (walked) between two parks and rally points.

Unless your visit allows for a fight against city hall, you might want to consider CCing, with your VA permit, and enjoy your visit. Just remember, although National Parks are OK for carry, National Monuments and buildings where fed gov employees regularly report for duty ARE prohibited, and those prohibitions are fairly numerous because of the historical nature of the city.

[BB62]

Thanks very much for the reply.

It looks like PA needs Florida's version of preemption, which disallows the "promulgation" of laws. That and Florida's relatively new teeth in their law has pretty much ended this kind of BS.

Thanks again.

[Curmudgeon]

Thanks very much for the reply.

It looks like PA needs Florida's version of preemption, which disallows the "promulgation" of laws. That and Florida's relatively new teeth in their law has pretty much ended this kind of BS.

Thanks again.

We have preemption, that is what makes Philly's ordinance illegal and unenforceable (see my above post), and PA's preemption has "teeth", but they could be improved.

You would think state law would be enough to keep local lawmakers on the straight and narrow, but no. Just goes to show that often the worst criminals are elected to public office where the operate with impunity.

[BB62]

Here's a link to Florida's law, FYI:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/...s/0790.33.html

Here's some good parts:
(c) If the court determines that a violation was knowing and willful, the court shall assess a civil fine of up to $5,000 against the elected or appointed local government official or officials or administrative agency head under whose jurisdiction the violation occurred.
(d) Except as required by applicable law, public funds may not be used to defend or reimburse the unlawful conduct of any person found to have knowingly and willfully violated this section.

AND

A person or an organization whose membership is adversely affected by any ordinance, regulation, measure, directive, rule, enactment, order, or policy promulgated or caused to be enforced in violation of this section may file suit against any county, agency, municipality, district, or other entity in any court of this state having jurisdiction over any defendant to the suit for declaratory and injunctive relief and for actual damages, as limited herein, caused by the violation. A court shall award the prevailing plaintiff in any such suit:

1. Reasonable attorney’s fees and costs in accordance with the laws of this state, including a contingency fee multiplier, as authorized by law; and
2. The actual damages incurred, but not more than $100,000.