Pennsylvania gun owners may soon face a confusing array of unexpected restrictions if a state representative’s proposal moves forward.
Democratic Representative Dan Frankel introduced HB 2506 on Monday, aiming to eliminate the state’s firearms preemption law. This change would empower local governments to set their own rules regarding the carrying, transporting, purchasing, and possessing of firearms. Alongside this bill, HB 2505 would repeal the state’s version of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, potentially exposing gun manufacturers to lawsuits related to criminal misuse of their products.
Val Finnell, a lobbyist for Gun Owners of America in Pennsylvania, expressed concerns, saying these bills would lead to a confusing mix of gun control laws statewide, trapping law-abiding citizens in legal complexities and creating opportunities for municipalities to target the firearms industry with litigation.
Mark Oliva, a spokesperson for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, called the proposed legislation “nonstarters,” emphasizing that it would create significant legal challenges for gun owners in Pennsylvania. He also criticized the amendment that would allow frivolous lawsuits against the firearm industry, arguing that lawmakers should focus on holding criminals accountable rather than complicating the lives of responsible gun owners.
In a memo supporting the legislation, Frankel stated that the current preemption laws prevent cities like Pittsburgh and Philadelphia from ensuring public safety. He claimed that these laws stop them from enacting measures such as banning certain firearms or mandating that gun owners report lost or stolen guns.
Frankel asserted that local leaders should be able to establish their own firearm regulations based on the unique needs of their communities, just as they do with fire safety or traffic laws. Notably, his memo did not mention the repeal of Act 59, Pennsylvania’s Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act instituted in 1999.
Giffords, a gun control advocacy group, pointed out that many states have some form of preemption laws, though the strength of these laws varies significantly. Some states, like Colorado and California, permit local bans or restrictions, while others maintain state-level control over firearm regulation.
The Department of Justice recently challenged Denver’s ban on certain semiautomatic rifles, even though Colorado has yet to adopt a statewide ban. The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action stated that differing laws within a state can create confusion for law-abiding citizens who might unknowingly break an ordinance as they travel.
Darin Goens, a lobbyist with NRA-ILA for Pennsylvania, described the proposed bills as a weak attempt to change the current situation. He noted that the Pennsylvania state Senate had recently passed SB 822, which reinforces existing preemption laws. According to Goens, this bill firmly establishes the state’s authority over local regulations, which he believes have been challenged by municipalities disregarding the law.
SB 822, introduced by Republican State Senator Wayne Langerholc, passed with a 30-20 vote on May 6.
