So with all the murder going on here in Philly, and all the Dems thinking that restricting gun ownership to the people that go about it legally will change things somehow, we knew that it was only a matter of time until new legislation was proposed...
Governor Ed Rendell (aka Fast Eddie) did that today. One of the proposed laws seems like a good idea so I'd be interested to hear if anyone would be opposed to it and why:
1) Not reporting a lost or stolen gun would be a crime.
Like I said, in my eyes this is a good thing. Why wouldn't you report a gun that was lost or stolen?
The other two proposals seem like pure pandering and just more legislation that won't change the homicide rate at all:
2) No more than one gun purchased a month
3) Let cities come up with their own gun laws.
D.C. is having their gun restriction challenged and from their crime stats it doesn't seem like it's helped them much...
"...Pennsylvania's House Judiciary Committee yesterday handily defeated two key gun-control bills despite a dramatic appearance by Gov. Rendell, who implored the committee to pass tougher gun laws to curb violence, especially in crime-marred cities such as Philadelphia.
Rendell's 40-minute appearance, in which he sought to refute gun-lobby arguments about weak enforcement of current laws and drive home polls indicating that most Pennsylvanians favor some forms of gun control, appeared to change few minds.
Six Democrats, mostly from gun-rights strongholds in the southwest, crossed party lines to defeat the two bills. Two Republicans from the Philadelphia suburbs - Rep. Bernard O'Neill from Bucks County, and Rep. Kate Harper from Montgomery County - broke from their party to support the bill that would have limited handgun purchases to one a month.
National Rifle Association lobbyist John Hohenwater said the votes clearly showed committee members had no appetite to restrict gun rights in an attempt to solve Philadelphia's crime problem..." (source)