Pa.needs to strengthen gun laws
I would like to ask a favor of all my Pennsylvania friends. This will cost you nothing and the effort will be minimal.I stand to gain nothing financially nor will I benefit professionally or in any other way other than in the manner that all of us might.
I’m asking you to call your state representative and state senator to ask them to create new legislation or amend existing legislation to provide further protections to citizens that may have to use their firearms to defend themselves against the mob that we see terrorizing the country every day. They will likely tell you that we already have sufficient protections. Well, the McCloskeys, the St. Louis couple charged for pointing guns at protesters, live in a state with “stand your ground” as well as the “castle doctrine.” They were charged with a felony for making visible their legal firearms to protect themselves against a mob of over 300 protesters.
Luckily for them, they have a Republican governor and attorney general. We do not. They had their weapons seized by the very same police that refused to show up to provide them assistance. And a felony conviction would prohibit them from purchasing firearms in the future.
Some ideas for providing these protections include the following: As it applies to your home: (the situation in which the Mccloskeys found themselves) expand the definition of “trespassing” and immediately increase penalties for it. Any individual(s) trespassing that do not vacate when ordered to do so will immediately be considered a threat to the property owners’ well being and safety. Failure to vacate and making any manner of verbal threat or escalating behavior to the point that the homeowner feels is indicative of the potential to cause harm will be considered an immediate threat to life/property. Any violation of any obvious communication that the property is private and that trespassing is not permitted will constitute an immediate threat to one’s well-being.
As it applies to being in public: Any unsolicited approaching by an individual or group obstructing the normal progress one would expect to have is considered an immediate threat to one’s well being. Failure to move on after being informed that their company/presence is not wanted will constitute an immediate threat to one’s life/property. Any individual or group that approaches unsolicited with any face coverings that conceal identity will be considered an immediate threat to one’s life/property.
As it applies to motorists: Any attempt to block an established roadway from normal course of travel shall be determined to be an act of terrorism. Any group sufficient in size to stop a motor vehicle traveling in the accepted direction of travel on any roadway shall constitute an immediate threat to life/property and the motorist may respond with utilizing their vehicle as a means of dispersing the mob attempting to terrorize the motorist.
As it may apply to any situation: Any deployment of any item, device, or product be it manufactured or homemade that can, in any manner, be perceived to inflict any manner of injury will be considered an imminent deadly threat justifying the use of deadly force by the citizen.
As it applies to the Second Amendment: No legal firearms may be seized that were used in any manner in the defense of one’s life/property/well-being until after an investigation and/or trial ends including appeals. Any failure of police response when called by a citizen within a time sufficient to prevent any perceived injury or loss of life/property that could conceivably take place will justify full use of any legally owned firearm. If the firearm is used then the firearm is seized for a ballistics check to determine if it was used in the commission of any crime shall be kept no longer than two times the amount of time that passes between the authorities being notified and the firearms being seized and will in no situation exceed two weeks.
Keep in mind these are suggestions and you may not even need to give any suggestions; but here are a few to demonstrate that you have thought about this prior to calling. Feel free to add or delete any. Again, I have no agenda other than to be certain that none of us go through what the Mccloskeys went through. We could call this the “Protection Expansions Of Property and Life in Emergency Situations” or peoples’ legislation.
Bill Stewart
Fayette City