Rendell vetoes bill to expand 'castle doctrine'

[RamboLiberal]

Gov. Ed Rendell on Saturday vetoed three bills, including a measure to expand a person's right to use lethal force against a perceived threat outside of the home.

The current law, the so-called castle doctrine, already protects residents' right to defend themselves in their homes, or "castles." The bill would have extended that right beyond the home and removed a person's "duty to retreat" to avoid a potentially violent confrontation.

"The bill as passed encourages the use of deadly force, even when safe retreat is available, and advances a 'shoot first, ask questions later' mentality," Mr. Rendell said in a statement issued Saturday afternoon. "I do not believe that in a civilized society we should encourage violent and deadly confrontation when the victim can safely protect themselves."

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10332/1106690-454.stm#ixzz16YgNwiR7

Stupid move by Rendell. Make Dems in this state even more unpopular! With a Repub Gov & Legislature coming in he's only postponed the inevitable by a few months at best IMHO.

[Sinistrous]

1. Excellent move by Mr. Rendell.

:applause:

[TheWraith]

5. Yeah, harm Democrats in PA just a little bit more.

Have you ever heard the story of Ann Richards vetoing concealed carry legislation in Texas? It was passed by both houses of the legislature, and was overwhelmingly popular with the public, but she vetoed it and they couldn't override. It was one of the biggest reasons she was vulnerable going into an election against a brainless mook named George W. Bush, and how that twit got on the road to the White House.

Here, all Rendell has done is make Democrats as a whole look bad, and given the opportunity to sign popular legislation over to a Republican.

[spin]

23. Why? (n/t)

[napi21]

2. I lived in PA for 47 year and was always told if an intruder invaded your hone nake sure

he was ded and inside yur house! I really like Eddy R and i hope he's chosen as Obama's Chief of staff. H was right ob this one.

[RamboLiberal]

6. Obama would be stupid to make Fast Eddie his COS

Ed went out one very unpopular governor. Even a lot of Democrats ended up loathing him here.

[old mark]

14. I'm one of them - he could not have done anything to leave a worse legacy here.

Many independents voted republican in November because of Rendell's anti gun views and refusal to accept facts over hysterical idiocy. He has screwed every furture Democratic candidate in PA, and made it morer likely that the GOP will remain in power for many years to come.

Fuck you, Fast Eddy - I really hope Mr Obama is smarter than I think he is and lets you retire gracefully...


mark

[Callisto32]

38. I was a high school junior when he was elected....

I worked the coat check at his inauguration. It was that night I learned he was a self important prick. See, there were two parties, one in a private box that cost something like $1,500 a plate. Guess what room he didn't leave all night. I have no respect for a man who won't even come out and shake the hands of the people that elected him to his high office.

I see little has changed in 8 years.

[MichaelHarris]

3. lets see

kill another human being or retreat and wait for law enforcement which could possibly result in no one dying? I think the Gov made a wise choice. Reminds of a famous Arlo Guthrie lyric, "I wanna kill, I mean kill, eat dead bodies...."

[TheWraith]

4. Or, be legally obligated to try to run away, and give up your only chance to defend yourself.

Then get shot in the back by your attacker as you run. Or get grabbed and raped. Or beaten until you're bleeding internally. Yes, I can't see any reason why you shouldn't be legally obligated to try and run away--after all, it's only a person's natural instinct IF PRACTICAL, and it's not like there's laws governing when lethal self defense is legal. :sarcasm:

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PavePusher]

12. Why should the laws for self-defense be different on the street....

or in a public building, than in ones home?

[cleanhippie]

16. What if the person had an AK-47 and a scanner?

[Glassunion]

21. And was invisible?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

46. and could fly?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

26. Then they'd only be a pair of latex gloves away from being a TSA agent...

[spin]

24. If you run from a man with a gun ...

there's a chance that he will simply shoot you in the back.

In my case with degenerative disk disease and a bad hip, I don't run, I hobble. If I had to retreat, my only hope would be that the prep would be laughing so hard that he would miss.

But if I live in Pennsylvania and stand my ground, a enterprising anti-RKBA prosecutor could argue that I didn't try to retreat and that I should go to jail. I might win, but than the prep or his family could sue me in civil court. Once again I might win but by that time the fees for the attorney would have ate up my life's savings.

Fortunately I live in Florida. We have reasonable gun laws here.

[RamboLiberal]

25. And here is some of the stupidity of the current law it would correct

Under present law, homeowners can use a gun or knife or other deadly weapon to defend themselves if they find themselves facing an intruder while in their living room, dining room, den, kitchen, basement or other areas within their house.

But some areas of a house -- a garage, a porch or deck, a driveway, a front or back yard, or a personal vehicle -- are not currently included in the places where an imperiled homeowner can simply fire at an intruder. Before doing so, the homeowner must first "retreat,'' meaning step backward, away from the intruder.

Under his legislation, ... a homeowner could use deadly force against an intruder who accosts him in a garage, porch, yard etc. without first having to step back. The "duty to retreat'' would cease and a homeowner could "stand his ground."

But in order to justify the use of force, the homeowner must "genuinely feel his life and safety, or the lives and safety of his family, are threatened,'' Mr. Perry said.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10278/1092834-100.stm#ixzz16dpMkiJd

[provis99]

32. and if you stand in front of him, he will shoot you in the chest.

so what's your point?

[aikoaiko]

30. Once again, I am sure you don't understand the topic being discussed

The option of requiring that one retreat is problematic in life threatening situations that may cause harm to victims of crime.

[Callisto32]

39. A little more of that projection stuff, eh?

[jazzhound]

7. The comparison with Ann Richards is valid IMO.

With a Repub Gov & Legislature coming in he's only postponed the inevitable by a few months at best IMHO.

This is what's so sad........the needless squandering of political goodwill. More red meat for the hard core antis, and more harm to the party with highly dubious "social benefit".

[RamboLiberal]

8. Exactly - a lot of Democratic lawmakers voted for it

Republicans and Democrats supported the bill in the House; it passed 161-35. All midstate House lawmakers voted in favor of it.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2010/11/pennsylvania_lawmakers_send_ca.html

The move allowed the state Senate to fast track the legislation for a Thursday vote, the final day the Senate has scheduled for voting sessions this year. The legislation passed by a vote of 45-4 and has been returned to the state House.

http://www.paindependent.com/todays_news/detail/castle-doctrine-clears-state-senate

[jazzhound]

10. The stupid -- it saddens and burns. NT

[jazzhound]

11. Should have said.........

..........More red meat for the hard core antis and Republicans, and more harm to the party with highly dubious "social benefit".

[SteveM]

28. Rendell disproves the notion that all politics are local. nt

[old mark]

13. Mr. Rendell has always been an asshole and evidently means to be one till the bitter end

He has done much harm to the Democratic Party in PA with his repeated anti gun tirades and nonsense legislation, some of it actually illegal.

He has done a great disservice to every future Democratic candidate in PA, and insured the GOP of a very long tenure in office...for NO reason other than HE is personally anti gun.

mark

[Callisto32]

40. "some of it actually illegal."

Indeed.

I guess he forgot about his oath...

From the PA constitution:

Section 21 . Right to Bear Arms
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.

[Glassunion]

42. Well... In his defense...

The last word is questioned... Not Vetoed.

[Callisto32]

43. At common law

the higher levels of mens rea encompass the lower. For example, if one did something recklessly, that was enough to satisfy the lower "negligently" if the crime required negligence. I would apply that principle here, and say that since vetoing something is a "higher" act than questioning it, he would be guilty of...treason against the commonwealth(?) for violating its constitution after taking an oath to it.

P.S. I know you were being a little flippant.

[Glassunion]

44. A "little" flippant?

I was going for "flamboyant".

[lawodevolution]

15. The "castle doctrine" debate

One side thinks there will be wild west shoot outs in the street. Everyone will be shooting and stabbing each other.

On the other side there is the belief that individuals will not initiate a violent action if they know there is a good chance it will be met with resistance. In the past the evil and violent members of society have been increasingly empowered by being able to engage in violence knowing their victims had to legally retreat. This bill will not effect organized crime because when they fight no one bothers to follow the law and retreat, this law only empowers law abiding citizens to defend themselves against attackers.
This bill is going to be signed, it's a matter of time.

[onehandle]

17. Not the Homer Simpson law!

Wiggum: Now sideshow bob cant get in without me knowing and once a man is in your home anything you do to him is nice and legal.

Homer: Is that so? (Leans out window and calls to Ned.) Oh Flanders, won't you join me in my kitchen? (Homer waits to pounce Ned and pounds his fist into his hand.)

Wiggum: Uh, it doesn't work if you invite them in.

Ned: Hidely Hey!

Homer: Go home.

Ned: Toodly Doo!

[X_Digger]

18. Wrong again.

The measure in PA is removing the 'duty to retreat'. Go find another inane analogy that's more relevant.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cleanhippie]

20. As usual, your arguments are based in fiction, not reality.

Very appropriate that you use a TV cartoon as your premise.

[spin]

22. The law has worked out well in Florida ...

and the law has not been repealed in any of the states that passed it.

It just makes the bad guys lives more difficult and prevents ambitious anti-RKBA prosecutors from railroading some innocent person simply defending his life from an attack into going to jail. It also stops bad guys from suing in civil court.

The Florida law is not a gun law. Period. It contains zero references to guns or shooting, unless you feel propagandistically compelled to count one of those ubiquitous legislative “Whereases” that references the Florida Constitution’s “right of the people to bear arms…”

The Florida law is a self-defense, self-protection law. It has four key components:

* It establishes that law-abiding residents and visitors may legally presume the threat of bodily harm or death from anyone who breaks into a residence or occupied vehicle and may use defensive force, including deadly force, against the intruder.

* In any other place where a person “has a right to be,” that person has “no duty to retreat” if attacked and may “meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”

* In either case, a person using any force permitted by the law is immune from criminal prosecution or civil action and cannot be arrested unless a law enforcement agency determines there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.

* If a civil action is brought and the court finds the defendant to be immune based on the parameters of the law, the defendant will be awarded all costs of defense.
http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/in_our_opinion/florida-self-defense-law.htm

[Atypical Liberal]

27. I don't understand this.

>"I do not believe that in a civilized society we should encourage violent and
>deadly confrontation when the victim can safely protect themselves."

I don't understand why someone in their home faced with a home invasion should ever have to be in the position of defending their choice to defend their lives and property instead of running away.

[aikoaiko]

29. He chose poorly

[Glassunion]

31. What are the chances the House will override the veto?

We only need a 2/3 vote.

It passed by a 4/5 margin in the house and a 9/10 margin in the Senate.

[RamboLiberal]

36. Probably very good

Or it will be passed again & signed when Corbett takes office. I bet this is law before end of 1st quarter 2011.

[RamboLiberal]

33. Gov. Ed Rendell says he might have signed Castle Doctrine if gun ownership loophole were closed

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell said he might have signed into law a bill to expand gun-owners’ rights if it had also contained a provision to close the so-called Florida loophole, which allows Pennsylvanians to obtain a gun permit from another state even if they are denied one by Pennsylvania.

Rendell and other gun-control advocates had sought unsuccessfully to end that practice. In a conference call with reporters today, Rendell said that provision might have tipped the balance and made him sign the expansion of the state’s Castle Doctrine, which he vetoed on Saturday.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2010/11/gov_ed_rendell_says_he_might_h.html

[X_Digger]

34. The Philly 'character and reputation' clause? Good luck with that, Eddie.

Philadelphia (and hence, Eddie) is pissed that the PA state legislature has a reciprocity agreement with Florida. Florida issues non-resident permits after non-residents meet the same criteria that residents do-

Take a class that demonstrates competency with a firearm, submit your fingerprints for an FBI background check, not have one of the following-

o A felony conviction (unless civil and firearm rights have been restored by the convicting authority).
o Having adjudication withheld or sentence suspended on a felony or misdemeanor crime of violence unless three years have elapsed since probation or other conditions set by the court have been fulfilled.
o A conviction for a misdemeanor crime of violence in the last three years.
o A conviction for violation of controlled substance laws or multiple arrests for such offenses.
o A record of drug or alcohol abuse.
o Two or more DUI convictions within the previous three years.
o Being committed to a mental institution or adjudged incompetent or mentally defective.
o Failing to provide proof of proficiency with a firearm.
o Having been issued a domestic violence injunction or an injunction against repeat violence that is currently in force.
o Renouncement of U.S. citizenship.
o A dishonorable discharge from the armed forces.
o Being a fugitive from justice.


Philadelphia, on the other hand, adds a catch-all ability to deny a resident a permit- a 'character and reputation' qualification. To be determined by law enforcement, without the ability to effectively challenge.

So a Philly resident who would qualify for a PA license, but can't get one because they're a resident of Philly- can get a non-resident Florida permit, and there's fuck all Eddie and crew can do- other than harass people- http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20101103_Licensed_gun-holder_loses_guns___permits_after_he_and_cops_lock_horns_--_twice.html

Police think that Solomon was being insolent and used poor judgment, including by showing up armed at the same bus stop at which he was arrested the previous day.

"If he's that defiant, should this guy have a gun?" said Sgt. Ray Evers, a police spokesman.

How dare he 'be defiant'?!?

[RamboLiberal]

35. +1 - You defined Philly's stupid attitude & arrogance well

[Callisto32]

37. I belive Mr. Rendell is projecting.

Whenever I hear politicians say "this will lead to shootouts in the streets" all I can think is "how can you believe that? Seriously, who thinks people WANT to shoot other people?"

Then I realized, probably people that DO think like that...

[one-eyed fat man]

41. Opinions differ.

"It is the tradition that a Kentuckian never runs. He does not have to...he is not obligated to retreat, nor to consider whether he can safely retreat, but is entitled to stand his ground, and meet any (life-threatening) attack made upon him with a deadly weapon..." Kentucky Court of Appeals. Gibson v. Commonwealth,i 34 SW 936 (Ky. 1931)

No one should be required to yield to a criminal assault. To insist that you must flee your own home and avoid confronting the interloper with as much force as is needed to make him quit is ludicrous.

What kind of twisted notion of "civilized" behavior requires me to accommodate a thief, an assassin, or a rapist and makes HIS life less stressful?

[Tejas]

45. Rendel, Nutter, Daley,

I would love to hear them answer your question. Well posed there, very well posed.