Guns and neighbors.

The poor people of tony Lower Merion, Pennsylvania, must have felt like they woke up in the middle of Texas earlier today.

"Several dozen gun-rights supporters peacefully descended on a Lower Merion park Sunday afternoon, where they protested a local gun ordinance and called on the district attorney to take legal action against the township.

 The township's rule does not ban legal guns from parks, but rally organizers say the ordinance is illegal under Pennsylvania state law. A crowd of about 80 people carried signs, American flags and firearms as they listened to speeches in Bala Cynwyd Park on the cold afternoon. "We're all here because we believe that real patriotism is a willingness to challenge the government when it's wrong," said speaker Steve Piotrowski of Citizens for Liberty.

Joshua Prince, a lawyer, told the crowd that Lower Merion would be sued and asked District Attorney Risa Ferman to bring legal action against all involved.

Two Lower Merion commissioners who attended said the township is not concerned about a lawsuit. The protest did not represent the view of most residents, they said.

"For all intents and purposes, this is an armed occupation here today," said Township Commissioner Brian McGuire, who supports the ordinance and attended the rally to talk to constituents. 

The rally kicked off with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence for Philadelphia police officer Robert Wilson III, who was killed in the line of duty March 5 when robbers invaded a video game store. The gun event, billed as being family friendly, intended to draw gun-rights supporters from across the state. Organizers said Thursday they were expecting between 280 and 480 to turn out, but the crowd Sunday was substantially smaller.

Gun-rights advocates say the Lower Merion ordinance is illegal under a Pennsylvania law that gives the state jurisdiction over firearms regulation. But gun-control supporters argue that Lower Merion's rule does not fall into any of the categories regulated by that state law. Many localities have repealed their gun regulations after a bill passed last year strengthened state preemption of municipal gun ordinances.

The law, known as Act 192, broadly defines people who can sue localities over their firearms rules to include most state residents and organizations - who do not have to prove they have been personally harmed by the ordinance in question.

Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Lancaster all left some ordinances on the books and were sued by the National Rifle Association in January.

With a group of state legislators, the cities have brought a separate case against the commonwealth, alleging that procedural maneuvers used to pass the bill were unconstitutional.  

Gun-control advocates think the effort in Lower Merion is part of an attempt by gun-rights supporters to get townships to rescind their ordinances before the court rules on the law, said Shira Goodman, executive director of CeaseFirePA.

"We believe that the law will be thrown out, so we don't feel threatened by a lawsuit," McGuire said. As the national battle over guns has shifted largely to the states, questions like these have become key parts of the debate.

Almost every state has some form of preemption, according to a 2014 analysis by the Carnegie-Knight News21 program. But Pennsylvania's law has drawn national attention from gun-rights and gun-control groups alike.

The NRA called it the strongest statute in the country. On Sunday, the gun-rights demonstrators' presence went unchallenged, though one person shouted "unpatriotic" from the other side of the park, and organizers said they found nails in the street near parked cars. " [Source]

"Guns don't kill people." But neither do laws against controlling guns.

*Pic from Philly.com

 

I Spy.

Here in our neck of the woods there is a story creating quite a buzz, not only locally but from what I can tell; nationally as well. You might or might not have heard about it by now.

Lower Merion is a school district just outside of Philly. Lower Merion High School is where Kobe Bryant (He of the LA Lakers) played ball, and it is, for all intents and purposes, a somewhat affluent part of our great state. They are so affluent, in fact, that they could afford to outfit everyone of their students with a brand new computer. And not just any computer; the fancy kind with built in cameras and the whole nine.

Well, it seems that the authorities from The Lower Merion School District might have been doing a little spying on their students with these cameras, and suburban parents being suburban parents, have literally made a federal case out of it. Yep, there is a class action lawsuit making its way through federal court as I type this.

"The suit alleges the remotely controlled covert cameras violate everything from the Fourth Amendment to wiretapping, electronic communications and computer fraud laws.

It was filed Tuesday on behalf of Harriton High student Blake J. Robbins and all Lower Merion students by Robbins' parents Michael and Holly Robbins of Penn Valley.
Named as defendants are the school district, the district's nine-member Board of Directors and Superintendent Christopher W. McGinley.

The Robbins seek unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, as well as an end to the "spying," according to the 17-page complaint.

The family first learned of the embedded webcams on Nov. 11, when Harriton High's Assistant Principal Lindy Matsko reprimanded Blake Robbins for "improper behavior in his home," according to the lawsuit. Matsko cited as evidence a photograph from the webcam on the boy's school-issued laptop."

Oh ohh, "remotely controlled covert cameras" can't be good. If this is true the folks in charge at Lower Merion might be in deep you know what. There are just certain aspects of the Constitution that should not be messed with, and certain lines that should not be crossed. Our right to privacy is one of them. I understand that these are students, and teachers have a certain amount of responsibility when it comes to policing their behavior, but not when they are off school property in the privacy of their own homes. Apparently the Vice Principal let the cat out of the bag by telling Blake Robbins that she saw him popping pills in his room, and that he might be a.....gasp! Drug dealer. (Memo to suburban teacher: you do not want to accuse a suburban kid of being a drug dealer. Mommy and Daddy will sue.)

"Because the webcam can capture anything happening in the room where the laptop is, district personnel could illicitly observe plenty more than a student's online activity, the lawsuit alleges.

"Many of the images captured and intercepted may consist of images of minors and their parents or friends in compromising or embarrassing positions, including, but not limited to, in various stages of dress or undress," the lawsuit charges."

Now you all know me I have to play devil's advocate a little bit: What if the teacher saw Blake making a bomb and writing a note that he was going to blow up the school the next day? Would we object then? And what if everyone got got a lap-top signed a disclaimer saying that the school could use this camera to track their computers because some have been stolen in the past? Would we feel the same way? I am sure that this is one of the arguments that the school's defense team is preparing to make. Wait....

"The school district says it has only utilized the security features to track stolen or missing laptops.

But the Robbinses' attorney, Mark Haltzman, "It's absolutely not true that this was a lost or stolen laptop."

Oh ohh, they might have to go to Plan B. Especially in light of this:

" Meanwhile, the superintendent of schools, Dr. Christopher McGinley did say in a letter to families that "there was no explicit notification that the laptop contained the security software. This notice should have been given and we regret that was not done." [Story]

Oh Lawd! Can you say settlement boyz and girls? I swear the rich always get richer.