6L6GC
Regular Member
imported post
Tony Macrini has Delegate Moran on the radio (AM 790 WNIS) from 9 to 10 this morning. I emailed in a question for candidate Moran. My question is:
"would you as governor sign into law a bill providing for civil immunity in cases of lawful use of force for self defense?"
His answer was that he was a long time, "strong" supporter of gun rights and was in complete agreement with what is called the castle doctrine. He, like most, don't seem to understand that the Castle Doctrine and civil immunity is NOT the same thing, even though the two are closely related.
He rambled on for a few minutes and it was clear that he is of the opinion that he thinks we already have civil immunity in such cases. He's wrong though. No surprise there.
He also mentioned twice that he thinks it is or should be perfectly legal to use deadly force to protect one (and one's family)in one's home. I guess once we go out the front door we're to be subject to murder, rape, armed robbery, etc.
He never did actually say if he'd sign the bill, although I'm sure that he meant his answer to infer that he would. I however am no fool and know that his record is one of contempt of Article 13 and the people who believe it is the supreme law of the Old Dominion.
Tony Macrini has Delegate Moran on the radio (AM 790 WNIS) from 9 to 10 this morning. I emailed in a question for candidate Moran. My question is:
"would you as governor sign into law a bill providing for civil immunity in cases of lawful use of force for self defense?"
His answer was that he was a long time, "strong" supporter of gun rights and was in complete agreement with what is called the castle doctrine. He, like most, don't seem to understand that the Castle Doctrine and civil immunity is NOT the same thing, even though the two are closely related.
He rambled on for a few minutes and it was clear that he is of the opinion that he thinks we already have civil immunity in such cases. He's wrong though. No surprise there.
He also mentioned twice that he thinks it is or should be perfectly legal to use deadly force to protect one (and one's family)in one's home. I guess once we go out the front door we're to be subject to murder, rape, armed robbery, etc.
He never did actually say if he'd sign the bill, although I'm sure that he meant his answer to infer that he would. I however am no fool and know that his record is one of contempt of Article 13 and the people who believe it is the supreme law of the Old Dominion.
