Proposed Pittsburgh Ordinance Riles Gun Owners

An ordinance proposed by Pittsburgh mayor Luke Ravenstahl includes a clause that would ban the carrying of 37 different firearms in the city “for the purpose of defeating lawful removal” by the police, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette reported. 

Intended to prevent G20 protesters from carrying weapons, the ordinance has been construed by some gun owners and supporters of gun rights as a back door assault weapons ban and the NRA has been informed of the ordinance’s existence.

But where some see an attack on their liberty, I see this ordinance as a rational proposal to prevent protesting hooligans from carrying automatic weapons in the streets of Pittsburgh. Tens of thousands of people are expected to protest the G20 summit and not all of them are going to be peaceful.

Indeed, the ordinance wouldn’t ban people from owning or carrying these weapons; it would only ban the carrying of these weapons with intent to use them in opposition to police directives. The one and only problem I have with this ban is that some on City Council may use it as a way to maintain an indefinite ban on assault weapons in Pittsburgh.

For instance, according to the Post Gazette, the ordinance has no sunset provision so it remains in force indefinitely. Councilman Bruce Kraus has even suggested that the ban might be necessary for “daily policing.”

But just as the ordinance itself is an appropriate law enforcement measure in preparation for massive, potentially violent, demonstrations, it is inappropriate for lawmakers to use this ordinance after the G20 summit has happened.

This shouldn’t really be an issue and it hopefully won’t be one in the future as long as Pittsburgh’s political leaders behave like adults and don’t try to use the G20 as an excuse to further their personal agendas. Of course, that’s probably asking for too much.