The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …
A woman in Scranton who was arrested for swearing loudly at her toilet when it backed up has been let go:
However, District Judge Terrence Gallagher earlier this week dismissed the charge on the grounds that while Herb’s language “may be considered by some to be offensive, vulgar and imprudent”, it is “protected speech pursuant to the First Amendment”.
It’s a disgrace that it even got to the point where a judge had to make that ruling.
It looks like the Chambersburg Public Opinion believes that guns and polling places don’t mix. While I don’t find their argument to be entirely unreasonable, the Pennsylvania Legislature could have chosen to make polling places off limits for carrying firearms if they were concerned enough about this issue. The fact that is, that the legislature chose not to do so.
The incident with Mr. Rotz is not really about public policy, it’s what the law is, and whether or not Sheriff Wollyung was within his authority to revoke this man’s license to carry a firearm. I don’t believe the sheriff was, as Mr. Rotz was not doing anything unlawful at the time, and asserted his legal right to be armed at the polling place. If Sheriff Wollyung does not like the idea of a man carrying in a polling place, he’s free to lobby the legislature to forbid the practice. Abusing his authority by making and example out of one man, and revoking his right to be armed without just cause, was not the proper or just course of action to take.
They’ve rejected Pennsylvania’s application, and are demanding justification.  Good.
The case I posted about here has finally hit the papers in Pennsylvania. Sheriff Wollyung of Franklin County is pretty clearly abusing his authority as a law enforcement officer, and trampling on one man’s rights:
“He was cautioned it was best to leave (the gun) outside,” Wollyung said. “Instead of taking the easy way out, he has to take the arrogant stand.”
So because he had the audacity to assert his legal right to carry a firearm in a place where he was legally permitted, he has taken the “arrogant stand”. I think it’s not Mr. Rotz who’s the arrogant on here.
The right to carry a firearm is not the right to annoy, harass, intimidate or alarm others, Wollyung said.
“I personally believe he violated the spirit of the law, if not the law itself,” Wollyung said.
That’s the worst of it. Sheriff Wollyung has declared himself to be above the law, and the sole arbiter of its “spirit”. If this isn’t Official Oppression, I don’t know what is. There is no “spirit of the law” it is quite simply not unlawful to carry a firearm openly into a polling place in this commonwealth. If the legislature wanted to outlaw this practice, or proscribe open carry for LCTF holders, it could have done so. It did not.
Tom Corbett, the Attorney General for Pennsylvania, is on the short list for a run for Governor in 2010 when Fast Eddie’s term is up. If he wants to build some more pro-gun street credentials, he’ll investigate the actions of this sheriff, and consider bringing charges under our state’s official oppression statute.
UPDATE: It would seem that Sheriff Wollyung, while highly concerned about people lawfully carrying firearms in the Commonwealth, isn’t all that concerned about one of the courthouse security guards returning to work while he stands accused of sexually assaulting a three year old boy. (NOTE: The Rotz in this case is unrelated to Greg Rotz, the man who has his license unlawfully revoked)
Sorry folks. You can thank Fast Eddie and the Philadelphia contingent for this one.
It seems to have become confirmed that HR 641, the Pennsylvania Castle Doctrine Bill, will indeed not be heard tomorrow. The apparent reason is that the black caucus threatened to walk out again over this bill. From the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Steven Cappelli:
“Due to conflict within the Democratic Party, the majority chairman of the House Judiciary Committee has elected to pull my legislation from consideration by the committee tomorrow. Therefore, I have decided to draft my bill as an amendment to Senate Bill 436, which is currently before the House,†said Cappelli. “I do not appreciate having to go this route in order to have legitimate debate and discussion about my legislation, but I will do what is necessary in order to move legislation forward that is vital to the safety of the people of Pennsylvania.
It’s a good time to write your representative and inform him or her you’d like them to support this bill when it hits the floor for a vote.
Gun owners in this state showed that they can get the job done when it comes to defending their right to bear arms. Now the question is, can we move the ball forward?
“Castle Doctrine” legislation, House Bill 641, introduced by State Representative Steven Cappelli (R-83), will be heard in the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, December 11 at 10:00 a.m. in Room G50 of the Irvis Office Building.
This critical legislation will ensure that law-abiding Pennsylvanians have the ability to defend themselves and their loved ones from violent attack without fear of criminal prosecution or civil action.
Letters will be going out tonight. Since this looks likely to pass, I will also make sure my state representative knows how I would like him to vote on this when it comes to the floor for a vote. I think we can put Castle Doctrine on Ed Rendell’s desk, and force him to make some serious choices in deciding whether or not to sign it. Regardless of what the Governor does, it’ll be a political victory for gun owners just to get it on his desk. Let’s get it done folks.
UPDATE: From Melody Zullinger of PA Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs:
Just got word that HB 641 has been pulled from Tuesday’s agenda and will not be considered. No further details at this time.
I’ll keep everyone updated on this one.
I’m not sure this is a debate really anywhere except among Pennsylvania journalists:
 When it came to whether Robert Pierce Jr. was justified in shooting a would-be robber, Northampton Country District Attorney John Morganelli said the decision was “crystal clear.”
“We don’t expect our citizens to wait until they’re shot,” he said at a news conference this week.
He’s referring to the self-defense shooting case I blogged about here. But there are other sides to the story:
Bryan Miller, executive director of Ceasefire NJ, a Newark-based organization devoted to reducing gun violence, said gun proliferation leads to more gun violence.
“It’s clear that the more guns you put on the street, in whoever’s hands, the more likely that there will be gun violence,” Miller said. “Allowing citizens to carry guns around does not make society safer.”
Miller said New Jersey has fewer gun-related incidents because the state does not allow permits to carry concealed guns.
To be sure New Jersey has fewer gun-related incidents like this, because New Jersey denies honest citizens the right to protect themselves. In New Jersey, Mr. Pierce would just be another statistic; just another murder victim.  That would be just fine by Bryan Miller. It would also be just fine by Patricia McClain-Afford:
Patricia McClain-Afford, co-president of Guns Down, an Easton-based organization, said citizens carrying guns risk injuring themselves or becoming disarmed by a criminal, thus endangering themselves further.
“I just don’t agree with the idea that it’s right for people to get guns to defend themselves, because then the bad guys have guns, the good guys have guns and then everybody’s just shooting at each other,” she said.
Wow, I trembled before the intellectual veracity of that argument. The fact is that Mr. Pierce is alive because he lives in a state that allows honest citizens the right to have the means to defend themselves. The system works, even if some people don’t want to accept that.
Ed Rendell said he’d be back, and he will be, tomorrow at the Capitol.
Governor Ed Rendell, mayors and police from across Pennsylvania will rally in Harrisburg Monday, as a push for new legislation on guns. Last month, Governor Rendell made an unsuccessful plea to the legislature to take up a slew of gun control measures but lawmakers rejected them all.
He’s back, even though many pro-gun Democrats are telling the governor they want nothing to do with this issue. I firmly believe that we have to give the Democrats in PA the boot if we want to retain our gun rights. Your local guy might be well and good, but having his party in charge puts the Philadelphia politicians in a much better position to attack your gun rights. Think about that in 2008.
UPDATE: Traction Control has more.
“[Gun control] is an issue that, again, doesn’t break down under normal party lines, and if we’re going to win this we have to build a coalition, and that coalition in my judgment should include every southeastern Republican and Democrat. There’s no excuse for anybody from the southeast not voting to support common sense gun legislation” – Governor Rendell, 12/03/2007
Within several miles of my house are at least four gun shops. Literally right around the block there is one.  When you think about how many shooters a single gun shop can service, that gives you an idea of how many gun owners there are in this area.
My shooting club, which is 10 miles up the road in the next Township has 1100 members, and we’re at our limit. There’s a waiting list to join. If you went to apply today you’d be turned away.
Chester County issues approximately 11,000 LTCs, Montgomery County issues about 19,000, My county (Bucks) issues about 24,000. Delaware County issues about 12,000.  That totals 66,000 licenses issued in the Philadelphia Suburbs. The city itself issues 32,000.  License holders are typically the most active in the gun rights community, and 100,000 region wide is nothing to sneeze at.
Ed Rendell seems to be operating under the mistaken impression that no one in the suburbs cares about the second amendment. I think he’s wrong, and come election day, we may have to single out a few vulnerable members of his little “coalition” and demonstrate that.