[PAFOA Alert] URGENT: PENNSYLVANIA ANTI-GUN PACKAGE VOTE ON TUESDAY AM - 11/15/07

[liberty556]

Philadelphia,

When I posted my email to Will Gabig, I was not referring to all people in Philly, just the liberals who's names are always attached to anti-gun legislation. Those are the Rendell followers I was commenting about. I met no offense to pro-gun people in Philly. I agree with you that it is time for Philadelphians to vote those anit-freedom legislators out.

[WhiteFeather]

Got some inside intelligence from a staffer that works for a major SE anti-gunner Rep, this staffer believes in our cause, so they feeds us inside information when they can without getting caught. That is all I am saying about that, so don’t ask.

Here is the scuttle butt: Governor is tentatively planning to gather all the anti-gun mayors from around the state to do a public relations event, applying political pressure to move / force anti-gun legislation before x-mas break.

The date I was informed of is around Dec 10, 2007 for the mayor to make a public plea to get gun control moving. Notice you won’t ever hear them talking about criminal control, just always talking about trying to only control tools of criminals.

The Anti-gunners are really getting desperate, and frustrated in PA.

Also our governor would like a higher office and to prove he is worthy of that reward, he must prove that he can get things done politically, in PA its gun control, so for Eddie to get that reward of a higher office our constitutional rights have to be sacrificed.

[WhiteFeather]

From: PA Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs [mailtofsc@pa.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 1:26 PM
To: PFSC
Subject: RENDELL "DISAPPOINTED, BUT NOT SURPRISED" BY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ACTIONS 11-20-07


RENDELL “DISAPPOINTED, BUT NOT SURPRISED” BY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ACTIONS

11-20-07
By Mike Howells, PA Legislative Services

“Disappointed? Sure,” the Governor intoned at a press conference this afternoon, “But not surprised.” Though he had hoped the House Judiciary Committee would give the gun violence bills voted down this morning a chance on the House Floor, Governor Rendell acknowledged he was not shocked to hear HB 18 and HB 22 failed, with HB 29 tabled until it can be “improved.”

Given the poll results showing strong statewide support for reporting of lost and stolen guns and handgun sales limits, “It’s a slap in the face to the people of Pennsylvania ,” the Governor declared. He questioned how much evidence needs to be shown that “get tough measures” alone are not working, and challenged House Republican accusations regarding state trooper levels. He asserted current trooper increases are the highest they can be under current regulations, and stated any slowdowns are due to logistical limits of the academy.

Along with Rep. Jewell Williams (D-Philadelphia), prime sponsor of the tabled HB 29, Governor Rendell declared, “We are not going away.” He announced he will stand with city mayors from across the state on December 10 to demand a vote on the floor.

Governor Rendell and Rep. Williams then answered questions from the media.

Given your passion for the issue, why did you leave after presentation this morning? Do you think your continued presence during voting would have made a difference?

Governor Rendell: It wouldn’t have made a difference. People have been brainwashed, and not given the true facts. They think Philadelphia justice is lenient, but in fact it’s been getting tougher and the problem continues to get worse. It’s a stunning fact that no one seems to want to deal with this.

Rep. Williams: The culture around here seems to be “don’t go against the NRA.” The Philadelphia Democratic delegation is part of the majority now, and is going to start leveraging its influence. People don’t normally shoot you with a legally-obtained gun.

Is asserting that people have been brainwashed the best way to go about changing “hearts and minds?”

Governor Rendell: Change is not going to be dictated by myself as Governor, or by any Representatives. It’s going to come from the public.

Would you have taken these actions before the election last year?

Governor Rendell: I would have, because I had absolutely nothing to lose. When politicians look at a poll, the results should register in their minds, but when phone calls mustered by a single interest group start coming in, they get scared.

How long will it take to get Rep. Williams’ bill back on the table, and what changes to it will be made?

Rep. Williams: The Philadelphia delegation will be applying leverage to get it back after Thanksgiving. I will continue to meet with Judiciary Committee Chairman Tom Caltagirone (D-Berks) on the issue.

Are you sorry so many western PA Democrats didn’t vote with you?

Rep. Williams: I am disturbed they weren’t sensitive to the problems of cities across Pennsylvania .

Governor Rendell: What’s stunning is the increases are statewide, not just limited to Philadelphia .

Why did you testify if you knew you were going to lose?

Governor Rendell: I needed to galvanize the public. They are going to be angry when they see the meeting and its results. Where does passion for standing by our law enforcement officers go when they ask for something difficult? You can’t be a “sunshine patriot.”

Why did you leave before the meeting was concluded?

Governor Rendell: My testimony was over. I was given the unprecedented opportunity by Chairman Caltagirone to testify before the committee. It would have been rude to stay after I had given it.

House Republicans have criticized Rep. Williams’ bill as being too draconian. Do you believe that is a sincere criticism or just a tactic?

Governor Rendell: I would support any bill that requires reporting to the authorities the loss of a firearm within a rational amount of time. A week would be fine, as long as it gets to the floor for a vote.

Rep. Williams: I agree. I believe it is a sincere critique, but while we debate, people are dying.

Is one reason you want all members to vote so that you could then use their records to leverage political pressure?

Governor Rendell: Sure. Cover All Kids was signed a week before the 2006 election. It wasn’t an accident.

In light of recent events in other states, do you intend to consider enacting a moratorium on the death penalty?

Governor Rendell: No. There is a de facto moratorium ongoing on PA, and no one has been executed since it was brought back in the 1970s, except for several who waived their appeals. I will meet with the ABA , but not to discuss a moratorium.

[PennsyPlinker]

Originally Posted by liberty556

PennsyPlinker

I agree that we need fewer guns laws and that the law abiding need less red tape to deal with. I certainly don't want people charged for being a victim of crime. It does seem silly to me that a law is needed to enforce reporting when the good people in our society are going to do that anyway. I guess I am looking at this from the perspective that I would report the theft of any of my personal property. The item that was stolen is irrelevant in terms of deciding to calling the police and my insurance company. Something of mine was taken and I want it back.

I think we are in agreement about the general principle. In fact, shortly after my wife and I were married almost 24 years ago I had to fill out a missing shotgun report with the police. My brother-in-law left it in the moving van when we were moving and it went back to the rental agency. I searched all their trucks, did not find it, and reported it immediately to the police. The good news is, the owner had it locked up in his office and I got it back the next day.

No, the problem with a law like this is that there is too much wiggle room for the authorities to criminalize an innocent gun owner for not following some obscure procedure. It is nothing more than a tool to creep a little closer to taking them away altogether. Let's look at my own example.

I noticed my shotgun missing later on the same night the truck was returned. The rental company did not want me to look at any of their trucks, and would not let me on their property until I threatened them with either me looking or me and the police looking. But suppose I hadn't done that, and just waited meekly until the next day, or until the next business day two days later to talk to the owner. Then suppose that the local cops had it in for gun owners. All of a sudden I am a criminal for not reporting the gun stolen, even if it turned out it wasn't. The only law that would have been broken would have been the reporting law, but that would be enough to make me a criminal and prevent me from owning a gun in the future.

That is why laws like this are bad laws. It looks good on the surface, and why would anyone be against "common sense" gun laws like this one? But it isn't common sense, and one does not have to look very far to see the unintended, or (much more sinister), intended consequences.

[WhiteFeather]

From: PA Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs [mailtofsc@pa.net]
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 1:03 PM
To: PFSC
Subject: Committee Reports - House Judiciary - Gun Control Bills 11-20-07


House Judiciary


HARRISBURG - (11/20/07, 10:00 a.m., Room 140 Main Capitol)

The House Judiciary Committee met to consider four bills relating to gun violence.

Governor Ed Rendell testified for about 40 minutes before the committee on the need for legislation that will counter statewide gun violence that has gotten worse in just the last six weeks, with six police officers shot and one killed in Philadelphia. Citing Pennsylvania's "strong heritage" of hunting and gun ownership, Governor Rendell insisted that nevertheless, more needs to be done to deter and punish gun crime. He remarked the "real test" of how much legislators and government officials care about protecting law enforcement officers comes when they are given the opportunity to "do what is right" by passing laws that stop straw purchasers and the distribution of illegal handguns. Further, he asserted a law creating a mandatory minimum sentence of twenty years for anyone who fires a gun at a police officer must be approved.

The Governor opined on the statewide pervasiveness of gun violence, noting sixty-five of the 158 gun homicides committed in PA in 2006 took place outside of Philadelphia. Evidenced by sharply growing prison populations and the fourth highest number of inmates on death row in the country, he contended the problem is not that current laws are being weakly enforced, but rather that "we do not have the laws we need to meaningfully and adequately target straw purchasers and illegal handguns."

Reporting strong public support for laws targeting illegal handguns and straw purchases, Governor Rendell referred to a Greenberg Quinlan poll released several days ago that shows 96% of Pennsylvanians favor the reporting of lost and stolen guns, while 70% support limiting handgun purchases to one per month. He concluded Pennsylvanians do not want to "live in fear," and asserted, "The people of Pennsylvania have it made very clear they want us to listen to them and not to the special interests."


HB 18 Evans, D - (PN 43) Amends Titles 18 (Crimes & Offenses) & 53 (Municipalities) further providing for limitation on the regulation of firearms and ammunition for limitation on municipal powers by stating that counties, municipalities, townships and cities of the first class (Philadelphia) may adopt certain ordinances regulating the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition components when carried or transported for purposes not prohibited by the laws of PA. - The bill failed by a vote of 10-19, with Representatives Deborah Kula (D-Fayette), John Pallone (D-Westmoreland), Joe Petrarca (D- Westmoreland), Sean Ramaley (D-Beaver), Don Walko (D-Allegheny), Jesse White (D-Washington), Minority Chairman Ron Marsico (R-Dauphin), Thomas Creighton (R-Lancaster), Craig Dally (R-Northampton), John Evans (R-Erie), Will Gabig (R-Cumberland), Glen Grell (R-Cumberland), Kate Harper (R- Montgomery), Beverly Mackereth (R-York), Carl Mantz (R-Berks), Bernie O'Neill (R-Bucks), Tina Pickett (R-Bradford), Todd Rock (R-Franklin), and Katie True (R-Lancaster) voting in the negative.

Rep. Grell asked if any municipality could enact the ordinances enumerated in the bill, and was curious if Philadelphia satisfied its requirement to pass a referendum as required by the bill in 2005. Counsel Bill Andring explained municipalities could enact any of the enumerated ordinances after a referendum is approved, and confirmed Philadelphia satisfied that requirement in 2005.


HB 22 Myers - (PN 47) Amends Title 18 (Crimes) by adding that no person may purchase more than one handgun in PA within any 30-day period. Also, no person may sell or cause to be sold to a person in PA more than one handgun within any 30-day period. A person that violates this section commits a summary offense and would pay a fine of $300. The bill establishes the Violence Prevention Fund. Money in the fund is appropriated to the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency solely for purposes of violence prevention and youth violence prevention, including youth education and activities designed to prevent violence and grants to law enforcement agencies for equipment and training designed to prevent gun-related injuries. In addition to any other duty prescribed by this section, a seller of a handgun would request the Pennsylvania State Police to conduct a handgun purchase history check to investigate whether the prospective handgun purchaser is in compliance. - The bill failed by a vote of 12-17, with Representatives Kula, Pallone, Petrarca, Ramaley, Walko, White, Minority Chairman Marsico, Creighton, Dally, J. Evans, Gabig, Grell, Mackereth, Mantz, Pickett, Rock, and True voting in the negative.

Rep. Harold James (D-Philadelphia) asked if the failed bills could be brought up again for consideration at a later time. Chairman Caltagirone informed him the bills could be brought up again after a successful reconsideration motion.


HB 29 Williams, J - (PN 54) Amends Title 18 (Crimes) providing for registry for lost or stolen firearms and for failure to report lost or stolen firearms. The Pennsylvania State Police would maintain a registry of all firearms reported lost or stolen in PA. The registry would contain the manufacturer, model, caliber, serial number and any other identifying information concerning any firearm reported lost or stolen, as well as the name of the lawful owner of the firearm. If a firearm is reported stolen to a local law enforcement agency, that agency would collect the required information and would submit it to the Pennsylvania State Police within 24 hours. A person who is the owner of a firearm that is lost or stolen and who fails, within 24 hours after the loss or theft is discovered, to report the loss or theft to an appropriate local law enforcement official commits a summary offense, punishable by a fine of up to $500. A person who is found to intentionally fail to report a loss or theft commits a misdemeanor of the first degree for a first offense and a felony of the third degree for any subsequent offense. Also, the court may enter an order prohibiting a person convicted for a violation of this section from the purchase or any other method of acquiring a firearm for a period of six months. - The bill was tabled by a vote of 17-12, with Representatives True, Rock, Mantz, Grell, Kula, Petrarca, Minority Chairman Marsico, Pickett, Mackereth, Creighton, Dally and J. Evans voting against the motion.

Noting HB 29 originally failed in at a Judiciary committee meeting in June, Rep. Gabig asked how many times a bill could be brought up for consideration. Chairman Thomas Caltagirone (D-Berks) informed members that a motion to reconsider the bill was granted later on at that meeting, with the bill being subsequently passed over until now.

Rep. Greg Vitali (D-Delaware), referring to page 2, lines 22-29 of the bill, asked for clarification of failure versus intentional failure to report a lost weapon. Andring explained felonies and misdemeanors require "proof of culpability," whereas a summary offense does not. Intentional failure in this case, Andring went on, is rated a first degree misdemeanor for the first offense and a third degree felony for subsequent offenses. Ignorance of the law would be unintentional failure, Rep. Vitali surmised, which is just a summary offense.

Rep O'Neill remarked that in June he was "on the bubble" with regard to the bill, and was assured that before reconsidering it, efforts would be made to "improve" its language. He stated nothing has been done to improve the bill, and since the committee is voting on the same language it did in June, he notified the committee he would be voting negatively. Rep. Kathy Manderino (D-Philadelphia) commented she would be prepared to vote for Amendment A01932, which had been previously filed but not offered for consideration. Rep. James suggested the possibility of an oral amendment, but Chairman Caltagirone informed members that such action would get the committee "into trouble." Rep. Jewell Williams (D-Philadelphia), prime sponsor of the bill, moved to table it in order to work on improving its language. Minority Chairman Marsico stated the bill has been around for months, during which time it could have been changed, and opposed the motion. Rep. Manderino inquired if the prime sponsor could simply decide not to have the bill considered. Chairman Caltagirone confirmed that could have been possible had Rep. Williams' motion to table not been made.


HB 2060 O'Brien, D - (PN 2865) Amends Titles 18 (Crimes & Offenses) and 42 (Judiciary & Judicial Procedure) further providing for sentence for murder and murder of unborn child by adding murder of a law enforcement officer to the list of offenses requiring mandatory sentences; establishing the offenses of criminal homicide of law enforcement officer and for the offense of assault of law enforcement officer; imposing penalties; and prescribing sentences for offenses committed against law enforcement officer. - The bill was reported as committed by a vote of 27-2, with Representatives Vitali and James voting in the negative.

Rep. Vitali voiced concern over sections of the bill that relate to minimum mandatory sentencing, because the clauses take away the ability of a judge to examine the individual merits of any particular case. Cognizant of the fact that the bill would be reported out of the committee, Rep. Vitali nevertheless cautioned members to "be aware" of the issue.

"Breaking out of her mold" of voting against minimum mandatory sentencing, Rep. Manderino volunteered that she would vote for HB 2060, and commented it is sad that the committee had the opportunity to act previously and did not.

Rep. Grell questioned what grade an incident such as a bar fight resulting in the injury of a responding law enforcement officer would get both currently and upon passage of the bill. Andring reported assault of a police officer is a second-degree felony and would remain so under the new law. He explained the minimum mandatory sentence is in cases of attempted "serious bodily injury" of an officer.

Referring to HR 12, a resolution passed in October which directed the PA Commission on Sentencing to conduct a study on the use and impact of mandatory minimum sentences, Rep. James suggested waiting until the commission's report comes back before acting on HB 2060.

Several members of the committee gave statements regarding the outcome of the meeting.

Minority Chairman Marsico explained he did not support the bills because he believes the conclusions of various criminologists who have expressed the need for a comprehensive approach to combating gun violence, rather than "feel good" legislation. He emphasized the need to focus on putting more police on the streets, and chastised the Governor and his administration for not making public safety a priority. He cited the twelve recommendations drafted by the Commission to Address Gun Violence, none of which included any language regarding a limit on handgun purchases, and questioned why that has become a priority. He recommended that House Republicans focus on the "judicial use of law enforcement professionals" rather than "punishing law abiding citizens."

Rep. Daylin Leach (D-Montgomery) remarked the Second Amendment does not prohibit the restriction of guns, and asserted the First Amendment is "much less ambiguous." Speaking as a constitutional lawyer, he explained the courts have no absolutes when it comes to constitutional rights, and instead employ what is known as a "balancing test." In the case of gun sales, Rep. Leach opined the impingement on the rights of gun owners is de minimis when balanced against the safety it would bring. He concluded the issue is "not even a close question, constitutionally."

Rep. Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny) stated he believes the Governor is not putting on a "dog and pony show," and asserted the bills that were considered have been enacted in other states and not taken up as unconstitutional.

Rep. Pallone commended the Governor on his "courage" testifying before the committee in light of the sensitive issue of gun violence. He emphasized that while members "may have disagreed today," they are all dedicated to making Pennsylvania as safe as possible.

Rep. James noted that on March 17 of 2005, he, Rep. Williams and Rep. Ron Waters (D-Philadelphia) asked Governor Rendell to declare a state of emergency in Philadelphia to free up funds to counter the problem of gun violence. Two years later, the death toll from shootings continues to rise. He suggested a year-long trial period of the legislation in Philadelphia to see if it helps curb the situation.

Rep. Mackereth observed she can't see how putting restrictions on law- abiding citizens helps stop gun violence. She remarked funding for counties has decreased, while the ability for agencies to provide assistance in a systemic manner "is not there." She recommended a shift in focus towards "proven tactics."

Rep. Bryan Lentz (D-Delaware), speaking as both a former soldier and Philadelphia prosecutor, offered his continued support for the bills that were considered, and remarked the current state of affairs in Philadelphia and across the state is unacceptable.

Mike Howells, PA Legislative Services


Committee Roll Call Votes:
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...ate=11/20/2007

House Republican Press Releases Regarding Judiciary Committee Votes:
http://www.pahousegop.com/?sectionid...ctiontree=5,19

Radio Clips from Reps after meeting:
http://www.pahousegop.com/?sectionid...ctiontree=6,16

Greenberg Quinlan poll:
http://209.99.68.136/www/pa/library/2007/2007111970.PDF

[WhiteFeather]

Note this political timing, when was HB 2060 introduced (NOV 19 2007) and look how quick it shot thru this committee, got to a vote on Nov 20 no real discussion or consideration before a vote, was it even read by everyone before a vote?
No politics involved here with HB 2060?

Link for HB 2060 (note the date)
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...type=B&BN=2060

HB 29 got up twice before this committee for a vote. (Jan 30, 2007)

Why can't any PRO-GUN bills introduced in April get up for a vote once?

Go to this link for ACSL Anti & PRO GUN proposed bills to see what is pending in harrisburg.
http://acslpa.org/n-legislative/pa_p...egislation.htm

Go to first link and it open as excel spread sheet with hot links to all the gun bills Excellent research tool provided by Kim Stolfer ACSL legislative committee chairman.

It get updated every month or so……with more gun bills as they get posted

[Philadelphia]

Originally Posted by liberty556

Philadelphia,

When I posted my email to Will Gabig, I was not referring to all people in Philly, just the liberals who's names are always attached to anti-gun legislation. Those are the Rendell followers I was commenting about. I met no offense to pro-gun people in Philly. I agree with you that it is time for Philadelphians to vote those anit-freedom legislators out.

Cool.

We need the support and help of the whole state making sure philly doesn't become some abandoned enclave of antis and there are lots of us in philly who recognize how important it is to retain our rights to defend ourselves against the criminal element.

Almost everyone I know in philly is pro gun or at least not at all anti gun for the law abiding. The antis just have the biggest mouths.

Our one pro gun guy is Fumo (he even has a private range in his house) and he turned out to be (apparently) a criminal himself. Very dissappointing (although it's likely he'll be re-elected anyway so one way or the other we'll keep our one pro gun guy in the assembly).

Anyway, keep up the good fight (and I'll do the same).

[liberty556]

I think we are in agreement about the general principle. In fact, shortly after my wife and I were married almost 24 years ago I had to fill out a missing shotgun report with the police. My brother-in-law left it in the moving van when we were moving and it went back to the rental agency. I searched all their trucks, did not find it, and reported it immediately to the police. The good news is, the owner had it locked up in his office and I got it back the next day.

No, the problem with a law like this is that there is too much wiggle room for the authorities to criminalize an innocent gun owner for not following some obscure procedure. It is nothing more than a tool to creep a little closer to taking them away altogether. Let's look at my own example.

I noticed my shotgun missing later on the same night the truck was returned. The rental company did not want me to look at any of their trucks, and would not let me on their property until I threatened them with either me looking or me and the police looking. But suppose I hadn't done that, and just waited meekly until the next day, or until the next business day two days later to talk to the owner. Then suppose that the local cops had it in for gun owners. All of a sudden I am a criminal for not reporting the gun stolen, even if it turned out it wasn't. The only law that would have been broken would have been the reporting law, but that would be enough to make me a criminal and prevent me from owning a gun in the future.

That is why laws like this are bad laws. It looks good on the surface, and why would anyone be against "common sense" gun laws like this one? But it isn't common sense, and one does not have to look very far to see the unintended, or (much more sinister), intended consequences.


PennsyPlinker

Thanks for the real life example. I read in another post that the original HB29 stated the stolen gun must be reported within 24 hours. I see how a situation like yours, being out of your control, could be used against you. I better understand the issue now and will push against this bill. I guess the solution to the lost gun problem is for the government to consider the theft victim innocent of any wrong doing until it can be proven otherwise. If the gun owner sold his gun illegally and was only reporting it as stolen to cover up the crime, which the liberals are claiming is the source of the illegal guns, then the gun owner should get prosecuted. We already have this law on the books. However, discovering and proving this violation requires "real" effort from the government and the law abiding are much easier targets.

[fultonCoShooter]

[WhiteFeather]

note it was the day before the vote, also Rendell is planing to trying to organize some suprise re vote on these bills around Dec 10, 07 using the big city mayors in a dog and pony show.

http://www.pagop.org/news/Read.aspx?ID=476

PA GOP: Rendell Seeks To Limit Our 2nd Amendment Rights

Monday, November 19, 2007

Contact: Michael Barley
Press Release


Rather than seeking ways to punish violent offenders, Gov. Rendell is pushing bills that punish law-abiding gun owners

HARRISBURG — Republican Party of Pennsylvania Chairman Robert A. Gleason, Jr. was disappointed by the lengths that Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell will go to undermine Pennsylvanians’ right to buy and retain a firearm.


“Gov. Ed Rendell and House Democrats continue to try to impose more restrictions and regulations on Pennsylvania’s law-abiding gun owners,” said Gleason. “I understand that Mayor Street and Philadelphia Democrats have allowed the city of Philadelphia’s murder problem to spiral out of control, however, I believe that Pennsylvania’s problems can best be corrected by punishing criminals, not law-abiding citizens.”


According to a recent article in the Philadelphia Inquirer, Gov. Ed Rendell has decided to take the unusual step of addressing the House Judiciary Committee in an attempt to influence House members’ votes. Tomorrow, after Rendell’s visit, the Committee will vote on a package of bills that have been stuck in committee for almost a year. The proposed bills would enact a number of measures that would deter people from owning guns. Here are the proposals that are included in the bills:


Limit handgun purchases
Allow municipalities to pass their own gun law restrictions
Punish the victims of a robbery, not the thief, by making it a crime to fail to report the loss or theft of a firearm to police within 24 hours of discovering the firearm missing


“In addition to limiting the right of Pennsylvanians to purchase and own a gun, these bills fail to attack the root of the problems Philadelphia is facing,” Gleason continued. “Before we limit handgun purchases to one-a-month for law-abiding citizens, shouldn’t we have to ask ourselves if that is really going to curb violence? People need to take personal responsibility for their actions, and that will begin when we enforce the laws that are already in place. The Republican Party of Pennsylvania supports our 2nd Amendment rights and wholeheartedly stand behind all citizens’ right to own a gun.”


We encourage all Pennsylvanians to call Governor Ed Rendell at (717) 787-2500 and tell them that we do not want our 2nd Amendment rights infringed upon.