Rule by executive fiat was rejected by the Thirteen American Colonies, including Pennsylvania, when they declared independence from England, and we reject such lawlessness today. The Attorney General’s revisionist legal opinion adds an entire class of inanimate objects to the definition of ‘firearm’ under Pennsylvania law that the General Assembly never considered, nor intended. As such, we are requesting the Commonwealth Court to enjoin Commissioner Evanchick and his Pennsylvania State Police from implementing and enforcing any policy or practice that would follow the Attorney General’s misguided definitional structure.
Adam Kraut
Director of Legal Policy
The Firearm Policy Coalition
December 20, 2019
BREAKING: Emergency Injunction Sought Against Pennsylvania State Police Commissioner Evanchick Following ‘Lawless’ Gun Ban Mandate, “Legal Opinion” by Attorney General Josh Shapiro
[See also: GUN-RIGHTS GROUP SUES PENNSYLVANIA OVER NEW ‘GHOST GUNS’ RULE
I donate money every month (matched by my employer) to the FPC.
It’s amazing what these politicians want to get away with. It’s almost as if they believe they are rulers instead of public servants.
The courts need to slap them down hard and soon!—Joe]
Yep, it appears we have finally traded one tyrant 3,000 miles away. For 3,000 tyrants one mile away!
I heard that from a BATF agent once. “We read the law like this”. That’s when I knew we were lost.
“t’s almost as if they believe they are rulers instead of public servants.”
I would say that it’s not “almost”. They do believe it. Most of them do anyway, and they ‘ve convinced themselves that their rule is “service”.
So when, for example, the Soviets were dragging two thirds of a town’s population to the firing squads, they were muttering to themselves about how stupid those people were for not “appreciating” the “service” they were doing for the world.
That is the mindset with which we’ve been compromising for several generations, and so we’ve been compromised into an untenable situation. And we’re not going back.
As I told my nephew yesterday; “Any compromise whatsoever between liberty and coercion results in coercion.” We crossed that bridge long ago, having been convinced that compromise is a virtue, and so it is no longer about “whether” we’ll live under a coercive system, but “how much, how soon”, e.g., when asked, in essence, “How deeply do you wish to be penetrated during your rape?” we’ve been engaged in that conversation with our rapists. It’s the only conversation we’ve had, for generations.
Outstanding summary of the problem!
Compromise with evil is no virtue.
It’s time to push back and push back hard.
I have felt this way for some time. And it’s not just the big things, it is many small things. And to add insult to injury many of the small things add up often imposing a bewildering array of hidden ‘taxes’. Just take building codes and land use regulations. When I was growing up if Dad wanted a pond or a new building he did not have to ask permission. Now you may not even get permission.
Can we undo these? I don’t see how – our society depends upon them. There are even entire industries that we have created just to handle changes we have made one ‘good’ step at a time.
We now have a living arrangement that we can no longer afford. We just don’t know it.
Civil suits are OK but what we really need is criminal prosecution. They are spending our money to defend themselves and nothing happens to them if they lose.
Courts?
Like the one’s President Trump has been filling with conservative, Constitution-abiding judges?
Heheheheheheheh.