ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Guns & domestic violence

| Monday, Nov. 28, 2016, 6:42 p.m.

Nov. 16 was the funeral for police officer Scott Bashioum. He was killed not because he was responding to a domestic violence episode, but because Pennsylvania law does not require people convicted of domestic violence crimes to relinquish their weapons.

Dalia Sabae was pregnant and killed because, despite a protection from abuse order, letting a dangerous person have guns is more important than protecting the lives of women, children and police officers.

According to a Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence report from 2015, for three years in a row, Allegheny County had the most domestic violence-related fatalities in the state. Guns were used in a majority of domestic violence-related killings across the state.

To truly support public safety and our police officers and protect women and children, we need to support state Senate Bill 1182, a domestic violence homicide prevention bill. Our elected officials must pass legislation that strengthens protections for domestic violence victims by keeping firearms out of the hands of convicted domestic violence offenders and defendants subject to an active final protection from abuse order. To oppose it sentences women, children and police officers to death.

Elizabeth Pagel-Hogan

Ross

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me