NRA-ILA Alert..proposed PA law would affect guns with ivory

[Bang]

Last week, a memo was sent to all members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives from state Representatives Vereb (R-HD 150) and Dean (D-HD 153) asking for co-sponsorship on legislation that would prohibit the trade of legal ivory and ivory products in the state of Pennsylvania. If successful, this proposal would prohibit the sale, importation, purchase, barter or possession with intent to sell legal, antique ivory and ivory products in the Commonwealth; thus, making any lawfully-owned product that contains ivory worthless.

The primary advocate of this legislation, the Humane Society of the United States, would have you believe that this is a sound approach for stopping ivory poaching and trafficking. However, this is a misguided proposal that targets firearms collectors, sportsmen and other antique ivory owners of Pennsylvania. This proposed ivory ban would create strict and unnecessary restrictions that wouldn’t prevent the poaching of elephants but only hurt law-abiding Pennsylvanians who have legally acquired the product.

For example, it would become illegal for small antique business owners and antique gun collectors to buy and sell many antique products containing legal ivory. The exceptions for buying and selling antique products containing ivory, such as musical instruments, jewelry, furniture pieces, guns and other valuable collectibles are limited.

Under this legislation, purchasing and selling ivory or ivory products would become a misdemeanor of the second degree and would set unreasonable fines of $1,000 or more. Law abiding citizens who have no part in elephant and rhinoceros poaching would potentially become criminals overnight by unknowingly selling products containing ivory.

American collectors, hunters, and recreational shooters have legally purchased firearms that have incorporated ivory features for decades. These include some of America’s most historically-significant and collectible guns. Historically, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has taken the position that nearly all ivory in the U.S. has been legally imported and that its sale in the United States did not contribute to the illegal ivory trade.

Please contact your state Representative and urge him or her to decline co-sponsorship of this misguided legislation.

(From NRA-ILA Alert)

[PocketProtector]

Wow. So glad they're addressing these urgent issues.

[stainless]

Wow. So glad they're addressing these urgent issues.

The state needs more fines because - budget...

[90volts]

Humane Society is doing a tough job in protecting our wild american elephants! oh, wait...

[MOUNTAINORACLE]

The lack of brain power that our liberal politicos never ceases to amaze me. Stupid is as stupid does.

[IIIIIREPOIIIII]

BUT I LOVE IVORY SOAP, THOSE BASTARDS!

[Grey Bearded One]

The elephants in question have been dead for decades, who cares? or "What does it matter?"

[john9001]

How can they ban the sale of "legal" ivory? I am no longer amazed by the stupidity of the people who make the laws we commoners have to live by.

[tlnzz1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_Post_Facto

Ex Post Facto Law:
An ex post facto law (from the Latin for "from after the action") or retroactive law, is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions committed or relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law. In reference to criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; or it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in at the time it was committed; or it may change or increase the punishment prescribed for a crime, such as by adding new penalties or extending terms; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime more likely than it would have been at the time of the action for which a defendant is prosecuted. Conversely, a form of ex post facto law commonly known as an amnesty law may decriminalize certain acts or alleviate possible punishments (for example by replacing the death sentence with life-long imprisonment) retroactively.
A law may have an ex post facto effect without being technically ex post facto. For example, when a law repeals a previous law, the repealed legislation no longer applies to the situations it once did, even if such situations arose before the law was repealed. The principle of prohibiting the continued application of these kinds of laws is also known as Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali, particularly in European continental systems.
Generally speaking, ex post facto penal laws are seen as a violation of the rule of law as it applies in a free and democratic society. Most common law jurisdictions do not permit retroactive criminal legislation, though new precedent generally applies to events that occurred prior to the judicial decision. Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution. In some nations that follow the Westminster system of government, such as the United Kingdom, ex post facto laws are technically possible as the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy allows Parliament to pass any law it wishes. However, in a nation with an entrenched bill of rights or a written constitution, ex post facto legislation may be prohibited.

[ChemicalReaper]

Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution.

As far as I can tell from the ILA alert, it's not an ex post facto law. It doesn't retroactively illegalize past sales, it would only prohibit more from taking place in the future. It doesn't criminalise possession, either, unless you intend to sell.

However, this law is largely pointless and completely stupid, and a ban on sale of ivory that already exists won't do anything to stop poachers.