PA Senate Judiciary — 2026-05-06

Thank you.

Here.

Yaw?

Here.

Proxy?

Baker?

Here.

So moved by Senator Dush, seconded by Senator Bartolotta,

Thank you, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to speak on Senate Bill 357 and your consistent, reasoned, and unwavering support for our fundamental right to keep and bear arms. Article 1, Section 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution is clear in that the right of the citizen to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be questioned. In a free society, the safety and welfare of we, the people, can never be guaranteed by criminalizing one of our most fundamental freedoms. Unfortunately, as we've seen coming over from the House recently and in Virginia, where it has just gotten horrendous at the impact against the freedom of people, good law-abiding citizens to arm themselves in defense of themselves and our country has been not only questioned, it's been legislated against. That's a tyrannical firearm confiscation and control. As chairman of the Second Amendment Caucus, I have reintroduced Senate Bill 357 that would establish a new two-tiered system which would fully allow for the concealed carrying of legally owned firearms. Senate Bill 357 recognizes that it is patently unjust and constitutionally questionable to impose layers of bureaucratic regulations on law-abiding firearm owners just because they preferred to carry their weapon concealed. Tier 1 of Senate Bill 357 would no longer require law-abiding citizens to obtain a permit to carry a concealed firearm in Pennsylvania. To reemphasize, citizens who pass a criminal background check to purchase a new firearm are the least likely to commit an offense with a firearm. Article 1 Section 25 of the Pennsylvania Constitution also guarantees to the people that to guard against the transgressions of the high powers which we the people are delegating in this Constitution everything that is in the Bill of Rights is accepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate. As such, the second tier of Senate Bill 357 would give citizens the option of obtaining a license to carry, still a license to carry permit that is valid throughout Pennsylvania and would provide for carrying of firearms in more than 30 other states that either recognize Pennsylvania's license to carry firearms permits or a reciprocity agreement is in effect. In conclusion, Senate Bill 357 would fully protect Pennsylvania citizens that follow the law every day, who should not be questioned, prosecuted, or imprisoned any time they choose to exercise their sacred right to carry a firearm. I respect that my colleagues in the Senate Judiciary Committee join the Senate Second Amendment Caucus in casting an affirmative vote in favor of Senate Bill 357. And again, Madam Chair, I thank you for your continued leadership and advocacy in the defense of the rule of law and our constitutional rights.

Thank you, Madam Chair. more a comment than question. With all due respect to my friend, the gentleman, the maker of the bill, I would say that the current state of the law is neither unjust nor unconstitutional. It's not lost on me that yesterday this body, our state senate, had a ceremonial session in the city of Philadelphia, and not just in the city of Philadelphia, but in the Constitution Center, our National Constitution Center, which is in itself a monument to the constitutional framework in which our laws are passed and in which our society thrives. the fact of the matter is that under that framework there is no right that we enjoy as citizens that is absolute part of living in a free society is understanding that there are limits on the exercise of our rights there are many examples of that some of the most famous of course occur in the realm of free speech. We know that defamation is not a protected right under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Likewise, the right to bear arms is not unlimited. It's not unlimited for a very simple reason, because for the state to be able to best protect its citizens, there need to be certain safeguards involved. That's why, for example, we have a system of background checks that are required in not quite but almost every time that someone goes to buy a firearm Why Because we want to make sure that the people who are purchasing those firearms actually comply with the existing law which prohibits certain individuals from obtaining and possessing a firearm. And why were those statutes passed by this General Assembly? Because there was a recognition that there are certain people that society thinks pose a risk to the greater public should they have possession of firearms. Now, the requirement that this bill seeks to overturn is not burdensome. It's a simple requirement, and it is one that strikes that balance that I just described in terms of the right to bear, and in this case, carry a firearm, and the interest in protecting the public. It's been nearly 14 years now since I got out of a holiday luncheon with my staff and turned on my phone to find it blowing up with news about a tragedy that occurred in a town in Connecticut that none of us had ever heard from before, Sandy Hook. And in that time, many of us in this legislature have tried over and over again to pass reasonable gun violence protection legislation. There is a bill right now that was passed in the House this session House Bill 1593, which is a bill that I offered when I was in the House and my colleague and friend, State Representative Perry Warren, now has, which would close that loophole in our background check system that I alluded to earlier, so that every purchase of a firearm in Pennsylvania would be subject to a background check. That would be a great place to start. It would also be great if we had the lost and stolen legislation passed. It would be great if we had the ERPA legislation passed. And at long last, it would be great if we passed a ban on assault weapons in this state. I know that there are not the votes presently in the state Senate to do any of those things. I hope for the day when we will be able to do that, because I truly believe that we have an obligation to the citizens of this state to do everything we can to protect them and to create a safe environment in which people can live. So with that, I will be casting a no vote on this bill, and I ask all my colleagues to do the same. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, to the points that my colleague has just spoken about, we do have background checks on handguns. we do have those available to us. And those that have a serious issue in their history or mental health crisis or anything that's been reported absolutely should be, you know, covered with that law that's already in the books. What I find confusing is that we allow anyone to open carry and that fine So we going to require a document from the government for someone to have a concealed firearm. So is this a preference to have people just display their weapons openly. I think that maintaining this law that really interferes with a constitutional right, and it's the second one for a big reason, I think really flies in the face of freedom and the intent of the Bill of Rights itself. so I encourage my colleagues to vote yes on this. I think it's past time and I think too many pieces of legislation have a very slow creep into our lives and onto the floor that try to take away our God-given rights and I truly believe that this is something that should be addressed, and I commend the maker of the bill for bringing it up, and I look forward to voting yes.

No.

Saval?

No.

Aye.

Kim Ward?

Proxy, aye.

Aye.

The ayes are nine, nays five. By a vote of nine to five, Senate Bill 357 will advance from the Judiciary Committee. We will now recess to the call of the chair.