Sen. Bryan Cutler response

[rompus]

I sent rep. Cutler (southern lancaster county) an e mail about our need to protect ourselves in rural areas because of very delayed response times of 30 minutes to one hour by the state police. His response was : Mr. Harper,

Thanks for your email. I do agree that in our area the call to the police is typically for investigative purposes more so than an actual deterrent or stopping of illegal activity. The one time I had to call them it took 45 minutes and thankfully it was not an emergent issue. This is precisely why I believe personal responsibility for our own protection and the second amendment are very real necessities for people in rural areas like ours.

Bryan


I've had some interaction with Bryan, pretty good guy.

[stabile007]

It is an entirely valid point. Just because Philadelphia has a police station just about everywhere does not mean the rest of the state does.

[eyecanshoot]

It is an entirely valid point. Just because Philadelphia has a police station just about everywhere does not mean the rest of the state does.

Just because the police are closer doesn't mean they can respond in time to save anyone. Crimes happen fast, and criminals don't stick around.

[rompus]

Just because the police are closer doesn't mean they can respond in time to save anyone. Crimes happen fast, and criminals don't stick around.

Yea I agree with that, hell you could live a couple doors down from a police station and get attacked, I'm sure it has happened.

[Brick]

Yes to all of the above. But remember in legal precedence after many court cases says the police have no duty to protect you!

But I'm curious. It seems that Rep. Cutler is a member of the Pa General Assembly. If so why does he hang his hat on the U.S. Const. 2A, then Pa's Article 1 Section 21 says it much more clarity?

[NacMacFeegle]

It is an entirely valid point. Just because Philadelphia has a police station just about everywhere does not mean the rest of the state does.

Police response time in Philadelphia isn't always that quick, even in areas were you normally have a higher number of police officers. It's probably better than 45 minutes, but even 15 minutes can be too long depending on what kind of situation it is. If the police think something is a low priority it may also take much longer to show up, if they even bother. The higher density of people and houses also makes it easier for a criminal to find another victim, even if scared off from their first target for some reason.

[rompus]

Yes to all of the above. But remember in legal precedence after many court cases says the police have no duty to protect you!

But I'm curious. It seems that Rep. Cutler is a member of the Pa General Assembly. If so why does he hang his hat on the U.S. Const. 2A, then Pa's Article 1 Section 21 says it much more clarity?

The 2nd amendment is the grandaddy of ours, and much more familiar I assume.

[Brick]

The 2nd amendment is the grandaddy of ours,

Don't think so, the following is text from Pennsylvania's Constitution of 1776.

XIII. That the people have a right bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up: And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power

source: http://www.duq.edu/academics/schools...stitution/1776

Note that is 11 years before the U.S. Constitution.

Understand, I'm not trying to put you down. But, we now have an Attorney General of the ilk that picks and chooses the laws she approves of to enforce. We can expect that Corbett is going to have a fight to be re-elected and we had better be prepared to defend our rights politically and legally. That means we damn well better know what we're talking about and why the precedent exists.

[ungawa]

Yea I agree with that, hell you could live a couple doors down from a police station and get attacked, I'm sure it has happened.

People are attacked and killed in police station parking lots.

But police have nothing to do with The Second Amendment or The Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

[rompus]

Don't think so, the following is text from Pennsylvania's Constitution of 1776.



source: http://www.duq.edu/academics/schools...stitution/1776

Note that is 11 years before the U.S. Constitution.

Understand, I'm not trying to put you down. But, we now have an Attorney General of the ilk that picks and chooses the laws she approves of to enforce. We can expect that Corbett is going to have a fight to be re-elected and we had better be prepared to defend our rights politically and legally. That means we damn well better know what we're talking about and why the precedent exists.

Interesting info, but most people don't bring up a states constitution when these issues come up, doesn't the fed take precedent? A state can't make abortion illegal just like a state can't make all guns illegal, but they can make it very difficult with restrictive laws. You are correct that our state set that up before the constitution, but without the 2nd amendment it would be meaningless. Am I wrong in this?