PA: most gun-friendly state in country? (Pittsburgh, Scranton: high crime, attorney, house)

[calid00d]

Other than philly, PA seems to be very blue collar and pro-working man. With all the 'good old boy' hard-working blue-collar rust-belt towns like Pittsburgh and Scranton, isn't this the most gun-friendly state out there?

[Marodi]

I'm sure that there are other states that are more pro-gun, but PA DOES have the largest number of NRA members in the nation.

[FatboyHD]

Originally Posted by calid00d

Other than philly, PA seems to be very blue collar and pro-working man. With all the 'good old boy' hard-working blue-collar rust-belt towns like Pittsburgh and Scranton, isn't this the most gun-friendly state out there?

Not with the current governor; Ed Rendell is probably the least gun friendly Gov. in the US. He is supporting Philly's anti-gun ordinance. Even District Attorney Lynn Abraham says it's unconstitutional. Police Commissioner Ramsey says he'll enforce it anyway.

[Pilot1]

PA is a good state for gun rights, but there are some that are better. However, its the best of the Northeast/Midatlantic states for the right to keep and bear arms, even with politicians like Rendel and Nutter who constantly try to erode them even after the Supreme Court's Heller decision. Despicable.

[dugdogmaster]

Originally Posted by FightinPhils

Unfortunately, it seems so. PA probably also has the highest number of confederate-flag license plates and bumper stickers of all states north of the Mason-Dixon line. The mullet hairstyle is still a common sight here, unfortunately.

Hee-haw!

Personally, I don't need guns. I'm thinking gun-nuts are lacking in the manhood department....making up for something, if you know what I mean.

Unbelievable. If it wasn't for that "Hee-haw!" America would not be what it is, and I'm not talking about stereotypical hillbilly misconceptions. I'm talking about the foundation of our nation and the pivitol role these manhood lacking people played in that. Do some history research.

[thecoalman]

Most gun friendly state has to be Texas, here's the law in Texas.... If you see you neighbors house being robbed and have a reason to believe that his/her property will not be recovered you have right to use deadly force to stop it.

§ 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in
lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is
justified in using force against another when and to the degree the
actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful
interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible,
movable property by another is justified in using force against the
other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force
is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the
property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit
after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no
claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using
force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


§ 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


§ 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person
is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if,
under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the
actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force
or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful
interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or
criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:
(A) the third person has requested his protection
of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third
person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he
uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent,
or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.

PENAL CODE CHAPTER 9. JUSTIFICATION EXCLUDING CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

[Icy Tea]

Hunting is huge in Pa and Pa has the best state gamelands sytem in the country. Thats why talking about banning guns is political suicide. Where crime is a huge problem, I.E. urban areas with high crime and illegal guns, there is knee jerk reaction by politicians to ban guns as a futile attempt to end the violence, constitutional or not.

[Hardison]

Not as of late, it hasnt been laws are being passed to restrain it.

[Juggernaut1547]

Originally Posted by Pilot1

PA is a good state for gun rights, but there are some that are better.

I completely agree. If I were to make a list right now off the top of my head, I'd put PA in my top 10 for sure, if not top five. It seems like a very good state for firearm owners.

Originally Posted by FightinPhils

Personally, I don't need guns. I'm thinking gun-nuts are lacking in the manhood department....making up for something, if you know what I mean.

It's your choice. Nobody's forcing you. Just remember this: we still have the right to keep and bear arms in America...for now.

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Most gun friendly state has to be Texas, here's the law in Texas.... If you see you neighbors house being robbed and have a reason to believe that his/her property will not be recovered you have right to use deadly force to stop it.

TX is way up there for me because of its castle doctrine laws. Where TX's gun laws confuse me, though, is with regards to open carry--it's illegal.

[bethany12]

I agree with Icy Tea. I don't think the rest of America realizes how important hunting is in PA. I know of several families that use the meat to supplement their food supply. It is a way of life.