[Diggler]

I wondered when we were going to get on board with this in PA.

[concerned about politics]

Pennsylvania is among more than a dozen other states considering joining the trend.

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.

[Rakkasan1]

"If you're found here in the night, you'll be found here in the morning."

[Jim Verdolini]

“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.

[Frohickey]

Biased choice of words.

[Stevenc131]

"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?

[Give Piece A Chance]

Fundamentally, this is about reining in overzealous prosecutors and tort reform. At present, shooting someone in self-defense means you have to live in fear of charges being filed against you by an overzealous prosecutor for failing to 'retreat'. In some felon-hugging jurisdictions like California, this may even apply to self-defense situations in the home thanks to state judges making up the law as they see fit.

Also, you can expect a wrongful death civil suit to be filed against you by the unscrupulous scumbag relatives of the perp even if the local DA who's running for higher office fails to portray you as a trigger-happy psychopath. The filing of such lawsuits should rightfully be proscribed.

The bottom line is those who exercise the most basic and essential of all rights, self-defense, should not be treated like criminals. Everyone should read In the Gravest Extreme and Stressfire: The Truth About Self Protection by Mas Ayoob for a better understanding of this issue.

[BenLurkin]

"Duty to retreat".

Sheesh.

[Dead Corpse]

There never should have been a "duty to retreat". Period. Just admitting that you have fewer Rights than your attacker puts you automatically into a "I'm a victim" mindset.

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.

[The Old Hoosier]

anti-violence groups

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.

[papertyger]

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.

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.

[Tribune7]

bump

[Badray]

In April, a large coalition of gun rights groups held a press conference to announce the introduction of this and several other pieces of pro gun legislation that will push back the intrusions on our irghts.

There are quite a few cosponsors in both houses. We may not get everything, but we expect to get most of them done.