[PAFOA Alert] Judiciary Committe Action: HB 641 (Castle Doctrine)

[SuperMoose]

i'll be calling the senator from my area who knows my dad, see what he will tell me and how he plans to vote.

[doug]

The Honorable Rep. Steven Cappelli (R-Williamsport) has released some facts about HB 641, and the future of the bill on his website.

In an effort to move his legislation forward within the General Assembly, Rep. Steven Cappelli (R-Williamsport) has decided to introduce his legislation to provide Pennsylvania citizens with the right to defend themselves and families while in their home or vehicle as an amendment to a Senate bill currently before the House of Representatives. The legislation was scheduled to come before the House Judiciary Committee tomorrow, but it was pulled after the Philadelphia Democrats threatened to walk off the House floor if it advanced.

“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.

Source : repcappelli.com : Cappelli’s Legislation to Protect Citizen Rights to Bear Arms Dodges Democratic Roadblock

[homefront]

Thanks for that.

[CCinPA]

Originally Posted by crazy charlie

It's time for all you boys and girls to contact your representatives and let them know how you feel. If your representatives won't even talk about what my rep., Steve Cappelli proposes shame on them and shame on you for re-electing them.

The Dems threatened to walk out when Steve's Bill was proposed and my latest e-mail from him indicates he is proposing an amendment to the current law just to get them to talk.

Come on folks. We all know this is a Dem. thing and it's about time to let these people know you mean business about changing your Districts leadership if they insist on playing the party game instead of looking out for you.

You bad butt boys that say you'll shoot the first person that threatens you in your home stop beating your chests and do something. All your AK's and other fancy hardware for your own defense are just bragging rights if you can't use them.

If you don't do anything at least take the time to register to vote and get these idiots out of office.

If I've stepped on your toes or ego so be it.

The stuff is going to continue to hit the fan if you continue to let the cool-aid drinkers run your State.

Well said and it is time to get what I feel the most pertinent piece of anti crime legislation through. Hell the black caucus wanted anti crime legislation, so here it is.
True shame on all of us if this does not make it through. We can do it and now is opportunity, maybe our final opportunity.
With all the rhetoric by Ed Rendell of tougher anti crime laws needed, well here it is.

The black Caucus wants anti crime legislation and here is . HB641 / SB436.

Come on people lets get this done!

[revo]

Hey folks. Please forgive my ignorance. Just a little confused here now...

Should I contact my State Rep? State Senator? Or both on this?

When I refer to the actual identifier, should I refer to HB641 or SB436, or just call it by name?

Thanks for all your help. My apologies if this is a stupid question. Just seems this thing is a moving target and I'm losing track of who to contact and what to refer to.

[Azzy]

The notion of an "anti-crime law" confuses me. Isnt it already against a law when you commit a crime?

I wish we could push for repeals of all this crap that comes out way. How about repeal of any laws that make this kind of common sense defense illegal?

[phillyd2]

We hate it when the other side adds amendments to bills just to get it passed but have no issue when it benefits us. Oh boy, I love politics and the purity of the process

[ChamberedRound]

So I sent emails to all the Committee members the other day to ask for their support of HB641, and I received a sad response from Greg Vitali. Did anyone else receive it? I would post it, but I have no desire to contribute to its proliferation across the Internet. In short, it was the typical "this bill will turn the streets of PA into the Wild West" piece, and ignores the one KEY benefit of HB641, which is to provide civil immunity to those who rightfully defend themselves.

It's sad that a representative for Delaware County is more interested being a shill for Philly lawyers and politicians than representing his own constituents.

[ChamberedRound]

Originally Posted by phillyd2

We hate it when the other side adds amendments to bills just to get it passed but have no issue when it benefits us. Oh boy, I love politics and the purity of the process

I do have a problem with it, bills should be heard on their own standing, regardless of the topic. But, what's good for the goose is good for the gander; if the other side can employ less than honorable tactics, then why should those that support our beliefs constrain themselves?

[Damage control]

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

So I sent emails to all the Committee members the other day to ask for their support of HB641, and I received a sad response from Greg Vitali. Did anyone else receive it? I would post it, but I have no desire to contribute to its proliferation across the Internet. In short, it was the typical "this bill will turn the streets of PA into the Wild West" piece, and ignores the one KEY benefit of HB641, which is to provide civil immunity to those who rightfully defend themselves.

It's sad that a representative for Delaware County is more interested being a shill for Philly lawyers and politicians than representing his own constituents.

No response here as of yet.


Damage Control