|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
PA: Amend Stand Your Ground law, don't repeal it
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Florida law clearly states SYG may be invoked upon a reasonable belief that “such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.” Florida’s SYG law conforms to traditional common law notions of self-defense that it is a “reasonable” not “actual” belief that deadly force is required. In contrast, Pennsylvania’s SYG law, as written, essentially requires an “actual” belief since the defender must see the weapon before acting.
Despite Sen. Santarsiero’s inapt comparison to Florida, Pennsylvania’s SYG law does not need to be repealed. It needs to be amended so that the statutory language includes a reasonable belief of an imminent display or use of a deadly weapon. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(11/15/2019)
|
| Outstanding letter. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Those, who have the command of the arms in a country are masters of the state, and have it in their power to make what revolutions they please. [Thus,] there is no end to observations on the difference between the measures likely to be pursued by a minister backed by a standing army, and those of a court awed by the fear of an armed people. — Aristotle, as quoted by John Trenchard and Water Moyle, An Argument Shewing, That a Standing Army Is Inconsistent with a Free Government, and Absolutely Destructive to the Constitution of the English Monarchy [London, 1697]. |
|
|
