• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

New bill to instantly arm abuse victims

Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Messages
344
Likes
2
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200610/NAT20061006a.html

Gun License for Domestic Violence Victims 'Dangerous,' Group Says
By Kate Monaghan
CNSNews.com Correspondent
October 06, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - Legislation pending in Pennsylvania seeks to provide victims of domestic violence with a temporary emergency license to carry a firearm "to make sure that they're able to defend themselves," according to State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, sponsor of the bill.

However, a spokeswoman for a state domestic violence coalition called the measure "dangerous, absolutely dangerous."

Metcalfe (R-Butler) told Cybercast News Service that not only would this measure aid domestic violence victims in protecting themselves, but overall, it would decrease violence.

"Giving that person [the victim] the ability to protect themselves is going to ultimately be a great help to preventing violence," he said.

"Under House Bill 2946, any individual who can demonstrate evidence of imminent danger to themselves or a member of their family would be entitled to a temporary emergency license to carry a firearm after passing a computerized background check of criminal history, juvenile delinquency and mental health records," Metcalfe noted.

"The temporary license would be good for 90 days to allow sufficient time to apply for a regular license to carry a firearm and undergo the potential 45-day waiting period under current state law," Metcalfe's office said in a press release.

According to Metcalfe, this legislation would also protect witnesses to crimes.

"[For] the emergency carry permit, I think the majority of people applying for it would be people that would be applying for it because they have sought out protection from abuse or that they potentially may be a witness to a crime in which the criminal is out on bail making threats against that potential witness," said Metcalfe.

"My legislation is based on one very simple concept: Lives are saved when law-abiding citizens are provided with every means necessary to defend themselves against violent criminals," Metcalfe added.

Judy Yupcavage of the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence (PCADV) disagreed, saying research does not support Metcalfe's position.

"All of the national research we've seen and all of the data points to the fact that it is not safer to be armed for self-defense," said Yupcavage, director of communications at PCADV.

Yupcavage also cited the possible danger of providing a weapon to a victim who may not be in a proper state of mind to bear that responsibility.

"It's a very volatile time, [it's] a firearm in the hands of someone who has no training on how to use it, and there are no requirements that you be skilled in, or proficient in, the use of firearms," she noted.

"To even attempt to expedite the process to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon is foolhardy," added Yupcavage. "Particularly victims of domestic violence -- we just don't support it. It's dangerous, absolutely dangerous."

Furthermore, Yupcavage worries that guns do not mean greater protection, but rather more deaths.

"With guns, there is such a greater propensity to not just kill one person, but to kill numerous people," Yupcavage said. "The ease of killing more people is there. It's just much easier to pull a trigger, and whoever's in the way gets caught in the crossfire."

Metcalfe sees not only a direct connection between protecting oneself with a firearm and the prevention of domestic abuse, but also a link to national security.

Self-defense "is one of the deterrents that terrorists have to have," said Metcalfe. "They must be cognizant of that potential defense that an American citizen can provide for themselves and their families, as a terrorist does seek to do harm to our American citizens."

This aspect reflects part of a broader legislative package concerning illegal immigration reform called "National Security Begins at Home."

"For law-abiding American citizens who are able to use their right to bear arms, I think it [right to carry legislation] is a deterrent, and ultimately, it is a defense against a national security problem that we see in terrorism," Metcalfe said.

And... discuss.

BTW, my buddy in PA, where I grew up, got his LTC in about half an hour, said and done. Cost him $25 or something. He just did it one day after work. That easy.
 
I see the potential for revenge killings here, but why let that stop this bill. If 10 people's lives are lawfully protected by the use/ownership of a handgun, and one scum bag wife beater gets lead poisoning, that's an equation I can easily live with.

Self-defense "is one of the deterrents that terrorists have to have," said Metcalfe. "They must be cognizant of that potential defense that an American citizen can provide for themselves and their families, as a terrorist does seek to do harm to our American citizens."

Couldn't agree more with this.
 
It's not mentioned in the article, but surely the emergency permit comes with some training, right? They don't just give you the license and say "Go nuts"?

If it does (require training), then good on them.
 
This Yupcavage woman sounds more like an "abuser's rights advocate" than a victim's rights advocate!

I love insinuation that an armed person is going to go on a killing pree just because they can, and that a victim is somehow MORE likely to be a victim if they're armed!

I'd tell her to research the facts, but Liberals are just plain crazy.
 
"All of the national research we've seen and all of the data points to the fact that it is not safer to be armed for self-defense," said Yupcavage, director of communications at PCADV.

Sure, because she's probably never seen a single bit of data in his life, and the only "analyses" she's ever read are from VPC or the Brady Bunch.

Asshats!

Ken
 
This Yupcavage woman sounds more like an "abuser's rights advocate" than a victim's rights advocate!

I love insinuation that an armed person is going to go on a killing pree just because they can, and that a victim is somehow MORE likely to be a victim if they're armed!

I'd tell her to research the facts, but Liberals are just plain crazy.

+1
 
matt said:
I see the potential for revenge killings here, but why let that stop this bill. If 10 people's lives are lawfully protected by the use/ownership of a handgun, and one scum bag wife beater gets lead poisoning, that's an equation I can easily live with.

You have a valid point with a bill like this, it is a possibility. Worth the risk, IMHO. [thinking]

number9 said:
It's not mentioned in the article, but surely the emergency permit comes with some training, right?

Another really good point. How to load, fire, make safe, unload. At least the basics.
 
"However, a spokeswoman for a state domestic violence coalition called the measure 'dangerous, absolutely dangerous.'"

The cynic in says the real danger is that arming domestic violence victims might seriously reduce domestic violence and put "domestic violence advocates" out of work.

These people aren't really interested in solving the problems they advocate for, they are interested in making money by being advocates.

Same thing with "homless advocates" and many others.

Gary
 
Back
Top Bottom