Wednesday, September 2, 2015

Misfire in Harrisburg

Three out of four state House members this week turned their backs on Pennsylvanians whose safety is threatened by the Florida gun loophole. Worse still, the bipartisan majority instead expanded gun owners’ rights to blast away at anyone if they feel threatened outside their home or even in their car.

Misfire in Harrisburg

0 comments

Three out of four state House members this week turned their backs on Pennsylvanians whose safety is threatened by the Florida gun loophole. Worse still, the bipartisan majority instead expanded gun owners’ rights to blast away at anyone if they feel threatened outside their home or even in their car.
 

The House changes to the so-called castle doctrine mean that armed individuals will have an absolute right to defend themselves beyond their home, as current law limits. Just imagine how that might escalate road-rage incidents into deadly confrontation, with shooters then claiming self-defense. Even a front-porch encounter between an armed homeowner and a persistent door-to-door solicitor could see lead fly.
 

“Someone can claim self-defense if they shoot someone who looks at them the wrong way,” warns Edward Marsico, the Dauphin County District Attorney and spokesman for state prosecutors. “You are encouraging someone to potentially take a life.”
 

This issue can’t be the most pressing one before lawmakers as they race out of town. The only urgency is that the National Rifle Association apparently decided this was the moment to weaken the state’s already lax gun laws.

 
Before expanding the castle doctrine, House members cut off debate on closing the loophole that allows Pennsylvanians to obtain out-of-state gun permits from Florida and other states even if denied a license by local authorities. One such gun owner who acquired a Florida permit faces murder charges after a recent killing in Philadelphia.
 

Lawmakers need to close the loophole before more blood is shed. Shame on the Republican-run state Senate if, instead, it takes up the castle doctrine.
 

0 comments
We encourage respectful comments but reserve the right to delete anything that doesn't contribute to an engaging dialogue.
Help us moderate this thread by flagging comments that violate our guidelines.

Comment policy:

Philly.com comments are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. And please, stay on topic. If you see an objectionable post, please report it to us using the "Report Abuse" option.

Please note that comments are monitored by Philly.com staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable. Personal attacks, especially on other participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.

Additionally comments that are long, have multiple paragraph breaks, include code, or include hyperlinks may not be posted.

Read 0 comments
 
comments powered by Disqus
About this blog

The Inquirer Editorial Board's Say What? opinion blog showcases the work of the editors and writers who produce the newspaper's daily and Sunday opinion pages.

Find out more about The Inquirer's Editorial Board here.

The Inquirer Editorial Board
Also on Philly.com
letter icon Newsletter