Jan 17, 2019 3 min read

There’s an old saying that “the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.” Good intentions can also lead to large legal bills, as the city of Pittsburgh will find out if it continues its effort to impose new gun regulations.

According to a report in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, two members of City Council, working with Mayor Bill Peduto’s office, came up with three bills aiming to ban some assault-style weapons, types of ammunition and certain accessories. They also want to allow courts to seize weapons from people who are deemed to pose an “extreme risk” to themselves or others, the newspaper said. Only two members of council have not signed on to the legislation.

But in a Jan. 9 letter to Councilman Corey O’Connor, one of the main sponsors of the bills, Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. said the following:

“As the district attorney of Allegheny County for the past 20 years, I understand the efforts to curtail gun violence and limit the accessibility to assault weapons, ammunition and gun accessories capable of causing widespread injury, destruction, and death. I am also aware of the city’s effort previously under Mayor (Luke) Ravenstahl which was decided against the city in 2010. While I certainly see the desire for such type of legislation at the state and federal levels, I believe that City Council does not have the authority to pass such legislation.”

Additionally, said Zappala, “I am also certain that you realize that if such legislation passes, there is sure to be a resident of Allegheny County who seeks to file a private criminal complaint alleging a violation of (state statute 6120),” which bans municipal firearms regulation in Pennsylvania.

In other words, Zappala is telling city officials that he might have to prosecute a criminal complaint against them.

The district attorney said he feels certain that the city’s Law Department has advised that the bills are unconstitutional.

In what seems to be a confrontational tone, Peduto spokesman Timothy McNulty fired back, telling the P-G, “The city is not sharing its legal strategies on these bills with anyone outside city government, and that includes the Allegheny County district attorney.”

O’Connor also showed no signs of changing course, telling the newspaper, “(Zappala) has a right to his opinion. But I’m not going to stop this. I don’t think other members of council are going to stop this. We believe we’re on the right side of history, doing what’s right for our residents.”

Perhaps the legislation would benefit the residents of Pittsburgh, but state law is very clear, and unless it is changed in Harrisburg, which is highly unlikely, cities and counties can’t take their own action on guns without putting themselves at risk of criminal and civil actions. And as we noted before, the legal bills will pile up, and residents will end up paying.

We have editorialized many times about the need for further gun controls. We don’t favor banning handguns or entire classes of rifles, but we certainly favor a ban on possession or sale of high-capacity magazines, and we support closing the so-called gun show loophole.

But having a crazy quilt of gun laws that change from one town to another is simply not the way to proceed.