TexasCHLforum.com

There are several things wrong with the story. First of all, there is no Philadelphia license to carry. It's a Pennsylvania license to carry issued by the county of your residence, in this case Philadelphia county. Second, a carry license is not even required in Pennsylvania to shoot someone who is stealing your property. PA licenses to carry are issued to carry concealed on your person or in your vehicle.

The reasons for revocation of a license are the same as those for refusal to grant one. So the fact that he had a license at one time and had it revoked would mean that something changed from the initial conditions. According to this story, his license was revoked in 2005 after a "confrontation with officers", and he assaulted an officer in 2008 when he lost his appeal to restore his carry rights. Reading further in the story, however, in 2005 he was charged with "charged with attempted murder, assault, and carrying a weapon without a license" but was not convicted of any offense. (Interesting that he was charged with carrying without a license when he was licensed at the time.) During his 2008 appeal, he became irate and supposedly assaulted a police officer outside the court room. He was only charged with disorderly conduct, however, and there's no information stating that he was convicted of that charge. So it sounds like Philadelphia police simply decided that he shouldn't be carrying and revoked his license, and it made him very angry.

The entire discussion of carry licenses is irrelevant to the case at hand. Yet the entire focus of the article is carry licenses, both revoked and issued by another state.

I'm not trying to justify what the man did. Without knowing any more facts than the few from this story, shooting a man 13 times seems excessive, but we don't know enough facts to make that determination. What we do know is that the story isn't about the theft of his property or the man he shot. It's about his right to carry and about a supposed loophole in the law. It's quite convenient too, considering PA is presently considering a law to close that "loophole".