Hundreds Voice Opinions On Pittsburgh Gun Laws

Pittsburgh is going to do it.

That’s the thought that keeps running through my head as I watch the trainwreck unfolding in a place that I normally associate with sports and the steel industry. I keep waiting and hoping that despite his politics, Mayor Bill Peduto will show some sense and recognize that his efforts to impose gun control on the city are quixotic at best.


Thursday night, Pittsburgh took an important step in doing just that. They held a meeting where hundreds of people voiced their thoughts on the proposed “assault weapon” ban.

And it was ridiculous.

Hundreds of citizens from the City of Pittsburgh packed into the City-County building in an open discussion before city council.

The lobby of the City-County Building was turned into a meeting room, with people standing in line for hours to speak for three minutes before city council.

The event that started at 6 p.m. lasted more than four hours. Community members waited for hours to speak their mind on proposed gun legislation being brought before lawmakers in the wake of the Tree of Life Synagogue Shooting in Oct. 2018. One 112 people signed up online beforehand to speak about proposed gun control legislation. More people showed up Thursday evening, however, and those people were given one minute to talk.

The building was so packed that officials would not let anyone else in the building until someone left.

“Every single day they hear of another shooting,” said one resident. “Consistently under threat and locked down. Wherever they go, they look for exits and an escape. They know in their bones they are not safe.

Another community member asked Pittsburgh City Council members which side they were on.

“One study states 3 out of 5 criminals report being or knowing of someone that was scared off by a good guy with a gun. No shots even fired. Whose side are you on?”

Some speakers chose to keep their speech simple saying, “I think passing these (laws) are one of the most constitutional and American things you can do. By putting well-regulated back into the second amendment.”


Clearly, someone doesn’t understand what the phrase “well-regulated” meant during the 18th century.

Back then, it meant “properly functioning.” A “regulated” clock doesn’t mean that the clock is subject to a number of laws on what kind of clocks you can or can’t own. It means the clock works like it’s supposed to.

While that meaning has fallen out of use in more modern times, that doesn’t negate the reality of how it was used. Especially since the rest of the amendment says that the right “shall not be infringed.”

Funny how they keep forgetting that part.

What’s baffling to so many is why Pittsburgh is pushing this. It has to know that regardless of whatever vote it gets, the law won’t stand. Lawsuits are already being prepared, I’m quite sure. They’ll be filed just as soon as it passes, and guess what? It’ll be overturned because the state has preemption.

Sucks for Peduto, but that’s just what it is. Pittsburgh can’t change that.

So why is it pushing this? Your thoughts?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member