The Republicans Are Really a Mess
UK Police Officer Had an Odd Exchange with a Jewish Bystander During Pro-Hamas...
Google Doesn’t Want You to Read This
Democrats Give More Credence to Donald Trump's Talk of a 'Rigged Witch Hunt'
Jesse Watters Blamed for Reading WaPo
'Our Constitution Was Made Only for a Moral and Religious People,' Part Three
DeSantis Honors Bay of Pigs Veterans on Invasion’s 63rd Anniversary
Gun Control Enables Sexual Violence
'Hating America, 101' – A Course for Homegrown Terrorists?
Illegal Immigrants Find Creative Ways to Cross Over the Border In Arizona
MSNBC Claims Russia, Saudi Arabia Is Plotting to Help Trump Get Elected
State Department Employees Pushed for Israel to be Punished in Private Meetings
New Report Confirms Trump Won't Receive a Fair Trial
Karine Jean-Pierre References Charlottesville When Confronted About Pro-Hamas Chants
Biden's Title IX Rewrite Is Here

Pittsburgh Moves To Eviscerate Second Amendment Rights

Well, this was expected. After the horrible shooting at Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh last October, the city is now moving to ban assault-style rifles, ban certain types of ammunition, and allow courts to ban gun ownership for people who are deemed dangerous. The city has suffered a terrible tragedy when vicious anti-Semite Robert Gregory Bowers shot and killed 11 people. He wounded six others, including four police officers. Police shot bowers after a gunfight. He eventually surrendered to police. Bowers deserves everything he gets in the court of law. 


Yet, as with most reactions to these tragedies by liberal America, it’s knee-jerk. All three proposals represent a dangerous encroachment on constitutional rights. The Steel City is following Boulder, Colorado, which also banned so-called assault weapons (i.e. AR-15s) within the city limits. There is a grandfather clause, however, permitting current owners who had already owned these rifles to keep them as long as they receive a certificate by the local sheriff’s office. It’s not a registry, but it sure sounds like a rest run for one. 

The only provision that could prevent future tragedies is the law that would permit authorities to ban gun ownership to individual deemed dangerous, but what are the criteria? This law, along with the many being proposed, is something that both sides could come together on to debate, especially if the language and protocols were thoroughly hashed to prevent abuse. On paper, it’s common sense—and it could serve the public interest, but loose phrasing is highly subjective. Laws like these should be a long, tedious, and hyper-analytical process to avid government denying Americans’ constitutional rights to gun ownership, which you know happens in these deep-blue corners of America. 

The Pittsburgh proposals are arguably unconstitutional and local gun rights groups have also noted Pennsylvania state law barring localities from enacting stricter gun control laws than those already on the statewide books, according to Reuters:


The Pittsburgh city council on Tuesday was due to introduce a package of gun-control laws including a ban on assault-style rifles, nearly two months after a gunman shouting anti-Semitic messages killed 11 people in a synagogue.

The measure would also ban certain types of ammunition and allow courts to ban gun ownership by people deemed to pose a significant threat of violence.


Assault-style weapons, with the capacity to fire multiple rounds in a short period of time, have played a significant role in the series of deadly mass shootings the United States has experienced in recent years.

Gun-rights advocates opposed the measures and threatened legal action if they passed.

Yes, those groups should absolutely do that if the AR-15 and ammunition bans pass. We’ll keep you posted. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos