Gov. vetoes 'Castle Doctrine,' lawmak...

Gov. vetoes 'Castle Doctrine,' lawmaker says it'll be back

There are 7 comments on the ABC 27 story from Nov 29, 2010, titled Gov. vetoes 'Castle Doctrine,' lawmaker says it'll be back. In it, ABC 27 reports that:

Gov. Rendell shot down a bill that would expand the rights of gun owners to defend themselves.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at ABC 27.

CCW er

Alexandria, VA

#1 Nov 30, 2010
Please forgive the juvenile tone but,
I TOLD YOU SO. The Constitution will NEVER be safe as long as ANY politician of this mind set is in office.
So if a thug pulls a blade or threatens your life or the lives of your love ones it would be a bad thing to defend yourself or the ones with you.
You are expected to run? You are expected to push the stroller faster than the speed of a bullet? Granny can hobble back to the house, right? This guy is an out of touch, can't see the writing on the walls, heavily guarded idiot. HE DOESN'T GIVE A FLYING FART about the safety of the law abiding citizens. Did any of you ever think of how much money is made from crime by other than criminals after a crime has been committed. Including undertakers.
Marcia Neil

United States

#2 Jun 29, 2011
What about all the drivers in vehicles without front-bumper license-plates, who switch to a stance and attitude that their vehicle is a bullet? At least some of the impetus for the 'Castle Doctrine' might be paranoia about those, and yet to some extent the proposed bill bolsters pre-meditated shooting plans.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#3 Jun 29, 2011
PA now has Castle law.
ha ha

Charlottesville, VA

#4 Jun 29, 2011
hey Gov. why dont you lead the way and get rid of your self defence
Marcia Neil

United States

#5 Jul 7, 2011
Besides, the real intent of such debate is most probably review of the right to pass and/or accept a gun to defend oneself/others whether the defendee is the owner or not. Unfortunately, such gun-passing remains the norm in remote areas, where some people think that noise-discharges within city limits are an acceptable outcome.
Marcia Neil

United States

#6 Jul 7, 2011
Besides, the most probable intent of such review is concern about gun-passing to defend themselves/others whether defendee is gun owner or not. Some people think that noise-discharge within city limits is an acceptable outcome of that activity, opposing laws to the contrary.
Wolverine

Cumberland, MD

#7 Jul 7, 2011
Rendell is a liberal turd. American citizens have no duty to retreat in the face of an attack.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Elizabethtown Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Wal-Mart Rebuffed, Residents Cheer (Sep '06) Nov 25 Jimmy Hess 2
News 2016 US Presidential Election: Where to watch t... Nov 9 Kim Campbell like... 1
Trump vs Clinton 2016 (The Issues, candidate po... Nov '16 MAGA2016 1
The Hershey Company Address (Jan '06) Sep '16 Nannels 394
York peppermint pattie Sep '16 yuck 2
Females only Sep '16 Jay 1
Do Derry Township Police Officers have a bad re... (Jan '08) Aug '16 good-2 57

Elizabethtown Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Elizabethtown Mortgages