Legislation won’t infringe
on constitutional rights

Speaking of Religion
The Rev. Dr. Tim Griffin

I had intended this week to write a column commemorating the Thanksgiving holiday. After all, Thanksgiving is a religious celebration that is distinctively American.
However, in light of the events of recent weeks, I thought it more fitting to write about gun violence and its impact on the city of Philadelphia. Because, let’s face it, gun violence is out of control in this city.
Since Oct. 28, five police officers have been shot, one fatally. On Nov. 1, Officer Charles Cassidy died from a gunshot wound. He was only 54 years old and a 25-year veteran of the police force. At the time of his shooting on Oct. 31, Cassidy was the third police officer shot in four days. Last week, two narcotics officers have also been shot. In addition to these shootings, Philadelphia police officers have killed 19 suspects this year in the line of duty. It should be clear that something needs to be done about all of this.
A recent Philadelphia Inquirer article reported police officers as saying that there are more guns on the street now.
After the shooting of the two undercover narcotics officers, Mayor John Street was quoted as saying: "I think people in Harrisburg and Washington who are resisting reasonable efforts to curtail the flow of guns out into the community need to take notice of all of this."
Mayor Street is right. Legislators need to act to limit the number of guns on the street. They need to do it to ensure that the city of Philadelphia is safer, and they need to do it to protect the lives of the police officers of this city who work to protect our lives.
The most reasonable response to this situation is for legislators in Harrisburg to enact two pieces of legislation: House Bill 22 and House Bill 29. HB 22 would "require the owner of a lost or stolen handgun to report its loss or theft to law enforcement."
I cannot see why this legislation is controversial. We require identification and documentation of the sale of handguns. If we recognize that this level of scrutiny is necessary and appropriate to keep track of handguns, is it any less important that we know when a handgun is lost or stolen?
HB 29 would "require purchases of handguns be limited to one gun per month." This is a limitation on the purchase of handguns. It means that one can only purchase a maximum of 12 handguns per year. However, I cannot understand why such a limitation is onerous. Does anyone really need to purchase more than 12 handguns per year?
Of course there are those who object to such legislation. They see it, for example, as an encroachment on the Second Amendment rights of the U.S. Constitution.
However, while it would place limitations on the number of handguns one can purchase and require one to report loss or theft of one’s handguns, this is not a violation of the Second Amendment. The right to bear arms is not thereby eradicated; it is merely regulated by the government. And it is well-established that constitutional rights, such as the right to free speech, can be regulated.
In addition, most of us have also heard the objection that if guns are made illegal, only criminals will have guns. However, first, there is no empirical evidence to support such a claim, and second, the legislation in question does not make handguns illegal.
I began this piece by remarking that I had thought to write on the topic of Thanksgiving. Perhaps there is a way of linking Thanksgiving to this issue of handguns.
We can express our appreciation — give thanks — to the police who serve, defend and protect us by lobbying our representatives to pass legislation that will assist the police in doing their job, while keeping them safer. That, it seems to me, would be a fine way of giving thanks.
Those who desire more information on reforming handgun legislation in the state of Pennsylvania and on HB 22 and HB 29 may visit www.ceasefirepa.org or www.handgunsanity.org ••
Father Tim Griffin is priest-in-charge at the St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, at 1946 Welsh Road in Bustleton.