House Judiciary vote on Pro-Gun bills Tues 3/18!

[WhiteFeather]

CeasefirePA is also actively lobbying against HB 921 & HB 2011

(you know CeasefirePA is the anti-gun group that is always lobbying for more gun control in PA every chance they get)

You should be asking yourself WHY CeasefirePA wants to keep PICS instead of NICS?

IF NICS and the Feds are so much worse on gun control shouldn't CeasefirePA be supporting or at least go neutral on HB 921?


maybe you should be asking yourself really why are you siding with CeasefirePA a group dedicated to restricting to the eventual elimination your firearm rights.


Fear of the Feds is often cited as "a reason" to keep PICS what about the real danger from the state enacted more gun control?

FACT no new major gun controls laws have passed at the Federal level for many years now.. Can the same be said at the state levels? in just 2013 boarding PA states NY NJ MD plus more states around the country all got major state enacted gun control laws.
So there is much real danger at the state level with more gun control.


By getting PA politics out of the transfer of firearm going to NICS would make it extremely cost prohibitive for at some future point for anti-gun PA legislature to register all firearm.

With keeping of PICS ROS held by PSP all that is require to expand, upgrade the database to register all firearms would to throw some extra cash as the process is existing.

Think that TOTAL registration of firearms will never happen in PA?

how about HB 239 ANNUAL FIREARM REGISTRATION - An Act relating to firearm registration; providing for duties of the Pennsylvania State Police; and imposing penalties.

Note who is going to be doing this is the PSP not the feds

This is a dangerous reason to keeping PICS with PSP administration and maybe why CeaseFirePA has asked all the anti-gun people to lobby against HB 921. . They are waiting for the day when they got the votes and they need PICS & ROS database to survive till then.


http://www.ceasefirepa.org/general-i...1-and-hb-2011/

Urgent: Bad Gun Bills HB 921 and HB 2011

Posted on March 14, 2014 by Sean MacPhee


There has been a major development today that requires IMMEDIATE ACTION.

The State House Judiciary Committee just released a surprise agenda for this coming Tuesday (March 18) and it’s a doozy. They are considering five firearms related bills, two of which are extremely dangerous for Pennsylvania:

-HB 921 would eliminate Pennsylvania’s background check system — a system which the State Police say keeps guns out of dangerous hands and keeps Pennsylvania safe; and

-HB 2011 which punishes towns for enacting local laws to keep their communities safe.

We need you to call or write your legislator to tell him/her that you oppose these bills, which threaten the safety of every Pennsylvanian.

If you are represented by a member who serves on the Judiciary Committee, we may contact you directly in the next few days to talk about additional actions you can take.

If Harrisburg is finally going to consider gun-related policies, it’s time to get to work on measures that will make us safer — expanding background checks and mandating lost or stolen reporting — not the dangerous measures pushed by the gun lobby.

Tell your legislator it’s time to protect Pennsylvanians and take a stand against gun violence.

This entry was posted in General Interest, Legislation and tagged background checks, Harrisburg, HB 2011, HB 921, Judiciary Committee. Bookmark the permalink.

[mingomom]

Letters sent.

I took a chance and added in the names of those without email addresses and sent them to pahouse.net in the same format as the other D emails indicated. We'll see if any bounce back.

[tollster]

I went down the list or Reps you posted and titled each email:
"Pro Gun Bills"

The Pasted this in each email using "Sir" Or "Mam" where needed.

Dear Sir,
I ask that you vote in the following manner tomorrow.
Support - HB 921 & HB 2011 WITHOUT any anti-gun amendments.
Oppose – HB 1091, HB 1243, and, again, ALL anti-gun amendments using the language from these as well!

Thank you,
MY Name and address.


I hope I did it all correct, as they tend to confuse the general population with the legal gibberish... me included.

[mingomom]

I received a reply requesting WHY we are opposing the last two bills as the NRA isn't fighting it. I can't seem to find anything on them. Who has links to a summary of these bills?

Thanks

[2Late45]

In the over-all big picture, I gotta' say no...

[Roland of Gilead]

I received a reply requesting WHY we are opposing the last two bills as the NRA isn't fighting it. I can't seem to find anything on them. Who has links to a summary of these bills?

Thanks

Here's the links to the bills in question

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...sIndex=0&bod=H

Here's Title 18 in toto:

http://reference.pafoa.org/statutes/...-firearms-act/



I got a response from my rep also, specifically about 1243 and 1498. As stated earlier, 1243's waiting period crap is way out of line. I am wondering what's so wrong about 1498 -- I must be missing something.

[R L Suehr]

I received a reply requesting WHY we are opposing the last two bills as the NRA isn't fighting it. I can't seem to find anything on them. Who has links to a summary of these bills?

Thanks

You can find the text of them here:

http://www.house.state.pa.us/index.cfm

Enter the bill number in the search box on the top left of the page (HB1091) for example. It will take you to a page where you can open the text of the bill as a PDF file.
I'm getting ready to leave for work or I'd put the text up for people to see.

[ChamberedRound]

Some comments to the above posts:

The Pasted this in each email using "Sir" Or "Mam" where needed.

It's not "Mam", it's either "Ma'am" or "Madame".

I don't mean to be a stickler on grammar, but it's important to sound professional in correspondence to legislators.

I received a reply requesting WHY we are opposing the last two bills as the NRA isn't fighting it. I can't seem to find anything on them. Who has links to a summary of these bills?

HB1091 proposes a more strict minimum sentence on those carrying in Philadelphia without a license:

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...type=B&bn=1091

HB1243 proposes that the PSP direct mental health records to NICS within 90 days of the passage of the bill.

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...type=B&bn=1243

As far as comments go, my personal replies to the query you received would be:

- Just because the NRA isn't opposing a bill, doesn't mean the bill isn't worth opposing. The Assembly is supposed to represent and be listening to the people, not the lobbies. At least, that what we hear when it's a pro-gun bill. When an NRA sponsored pro-gun bill comes up, and a legislator doesn't want to vote for it, their excuse is that they're not hearing from their constituency. Now all of sudden they're supporting an anti-gun bill because the NRA isn't fighting it? Where's the logic there?

- HB1091: Redundant. It's already a crime to carry in Philly without a license, and in a city whose judiciary continues to practice a failed "catch and release" policy, making the sentence stronger does nothing. The judges will still allow for early release/parole, and those who would break the law will continue to do so. Until the city actually imposes the existing punishment on the books, adding larger pentalties will do nothing to reduce crime.

- HB1243: Politically, this seems like a "poison pill" bill. If we keep PICS and background checks within the state, there's no need to send mental health records to NICS, right? This bill seems like an attempt at bargaining away the PICS removal effort by threatening to send mental health records to the feds. Regardless of the politics, HB1243 is a privacy issue. I don't want the federal government in possession of any more health data on PA citizens than they already have.

These aren't exactly eloquent responses to legislators, so don't just copy-past these; they need some polishing up. But, I hope it helps in responding to the legislators.

[tollster]

Its Ok, and I understand... just have a lot going on in my life now..

[ChamberedRound]

Its Ok, and I understand... just have a lot going on in my life now..

Again, it wasn't meant to be a shot against you, but rather for those who might contact legislators and not have recognized the difference.

I appreciate you contacting the legislators to have your voice heard. You're doing more than many people out there. Thanks!