Posted on 05/31/2006 9:34:33 AM PDT by neverdem
When a Somerset County man opened fire on two intruders at his apartment last month, killing one, he insisted he was protecting himself.
Whether Matthew Eperjesi was justified remains a question for the courts at a time of nationwide debate over extending legal protection for gun owners to shoot intruders in their homes and even people threatening them on the streets.
Gun rights advocates are applauding so-called "stand your ground" laws that have left anti-violence groups nervous. This year, nine states have enacted such laws, following Florida, which led the way with legislation passed in 2005.
Pennsylvania is among more than a dozen other states considering joining the trend.
"People are more fearful today for their well-being than they ever have been," said state Rep. Steven W. Cappelli, R-Williamsport, who spearheaded a bill under review by the House Judiciary Committee. "I believe we should follow the lead of other states and strengthen the rights of law-abiding citizens."
Cappelli's bill would allow Pennsylvanians to shoot before shooting becomes a last resort. Under current law, residents can protect themselves with firearms if placed in danger of death or serious injury, but the proposed law would relax what's commonly called a "duty to retreat."
In other words, that an intruder is breaking and entering would be proof enough that he means harm. Perhaps more controversial, though, shooters also would be exempt from facing criminal prosecution or civil lawsuits if they shoot and kill someone who is attacking them outside of the home.
"We believe it is fundamental to the American way of life and everybody's right to protection," said Ashley Varner, spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association. Varner said the NRA has made the "stand your ground" changes a top legislative priority.
Opponents are calling the laws "shoot first" legislation. Some even call...
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
I wondered when we were going to get on board with this in PA.
The first thing the socialists and communists do is disarm the people so they become victims and can't fight back. It reduces the population (like abortion and homosexuality) and leaves more wealth to share afterwords. It also gives total, ultimate power to the government over the people in case they have the courage complain about it.
Stay armed. Your kids lives are depending on it.
"If you're found here in the night, you'll be found here in the morning."
“When a Somerset County man opened fire on two intruders at his apartment last month, killing one, he insisted he was protecting himself.
Whether Matthew Eperjesi was justified remains a question for the courts at a time of nationwide debate over extending legal protection for gun owners to shoot intruders in their homes and even people threatening them on the streets.”
They were intruders in his home so of course he is justified. The real question concerns idiot DA’s and political police chiefs. I am sure he will be fine.
Biased choice of words.
"Gun rights advocates are applauding so-called "stand your ground" laws that have left anti-violence groups nervous."
Why is that all these 'anti-violence groups' only seem to get nervous when criminals are put in danger?
Got that sign. Also have, "Trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again".
Who do the felons vote for? Those who protect them.
Who do law abiding citizens vote for? Those who let them protect themselves against those who vote for felon protectors. (whew!)
"Duty to retreat".
Sheesh.
Sometimes prudent tactics make it advisable to try and retreat a distance before confronting a continuing threat, but this only muddies things at a time when clarity of thought is crucial.
Preserve your OWN life first, worry about your attackers life not at all. If they initiate force against you, they forfeit their Right to keep breathing.
Same reason all the 'peace activists' only seem to protest against American troops being in Iraq, but fall silent whenever their beloved 'freedom fighters' blow up a mosque, a shopping district, or storm a school and saw the heads off of the teachers in front of the children.
These groups are not anti-violence, or pro-peace; they are on the other side.
Ha, ha. Yeah, whatever.
Anyone remember the FReeper who shot an armed robber in a bar after the guy threatened to blow an old lady's brains out? I didn't follow the story, they were going to charge him with illegal firearms possession.
In the twentieth century estimates are that 34 million people were killed in wars.
The same study estimates that 196 million people were killed by their own governments.
To all the liberal lurkers: you may say you hate war, but defending yourself in war is better than being quietly killed because of your politics.
Arm everyone.
And there you have the summation of why liberals oppose this law.
It will prevent them from punishing defenders for living in a manner the liberal does not approve.
Precisely correct! The same was true in the 60s. Those maggots had absolutely nothing against war as long as the Commies won it.
Vaguely remember that one. Should have given him a medal. A public service award with the honorary "Goblin Slayer" title on it.
Because an orderly, SATISFIED, society has no interest in entertaining the desires of such groups to remake society is a manner said group prefers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.