Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
http://www.publicopiniononline.com/opinion/ci_7733951
Dec. 16, 2007
OUR VIEW: Armed voting pushes limits of civility, common sense
Public Opinion Online
Just because we have the right to do something doesn't mean it's wise to exercise that right in every circumstance.
Consider the recent dust-up between Sheriff Robert Wollyung and Chambersburg resident Greg Rotz, who showed up to vote Nov. 6 at a New Franklin polling place wearing a gun in a side holster.
A constable at the polling place -- unarmed in accordance with the law -- cautioned Rotz against carrying his piece to the voting booths. Rotz declined the constable's suggestion that he leave his gun in his vehicle.
Wollyung notified Rotz in a Nov. 7 letter that he was required to surrender his license to carry a firearm, according to court documents.
Rotz has not been charged with any crime. He was technically within his rights to wear a gun while voting.
As Americans and Pennsylvania residents, we claim many rights. We also have an obligation to make sure exercise of our rights does not infringe upon our neighbors.
We have a right to free assembly, but not if it blocks public roads. We have a right to practice our religious beliefs, but not if such prevents others from doing the same.
And we have the right to vote. If we do so in a manner that discourages free exercise of others' political will -- or makes them anxious doing so -- we may expect trouble.
If government agents are barred from carrying guns at polling places to avoid the appearance of coercion upon the electoral process, citizens should be mindful that wearing their guns to vote may have the same effect.
This is a matter of civility and respect for others.
Regardless of whether it's warranted, the sight of a firearm in a crowded public place will make people nervous, especially if they do not know the person carrying.
And while some who carry like to think they will be prepared if some monster shoots up a mall, just as many will lack the skills required to assess and deal with a threat while ensuring the safety of the innocent.
Training can sharpen aim and technical skills, but nothing substitutes for experience, judgment, and level-headedness.
In short, training cannot impart common sense.
-- By Matthew Major, on behalf of Public Opinion's editorial board
http://www.publicopiniononline.com/opinion/ci_7733951
Dec. 16, 2007
OUR VIEW: Armed voting pushes limits of civility, common sense
Public Opinion Online
Just because we have the right to do something doesn't mean it's wise to exercise that right in every circumstance.
Consider the recent dust-up between Sheriff Robert Wollyung and Chambersburg resident Greg Rotz, who showed up to vote Nov. 6 at a New Franklin polling place wearing a gun in a side holster.
A constable at the polling place -- unarmed in accordance with the law -- cautioned Rotz against carrying his piece to the voting booths. Rotz declined the constable's suggestion that he leave his gun in his vehicle.
Wollyung notified Rotz in a Nov. 7 letter that he was required to surrender his license to carry a firearm, according to court documents.
Rotz has not been charged with any crime. He was technically within his rights to wear a gun while voting.
As Americans and Pennsylvania residents, we claim many rights. We also have an obligation to make sure exercise of our rights does not infringe upon our neighbors.
We have a right to free assembly, but not if it blocks public roads. We have a right to practice our religious beliefs, but not if such prevents others from doing the same.
And we have the right to vote. If we do so in a manner that discourages free exercise of others' political will -- or makes them anxious doing so -- we may expect trouble.
If government agents are barred from carrying guns at polling places to avoid the appearance of coercion upon the electoral process, citizens should be mindful that wearing their guns to vote may have the same effect.
This is a matter of civility and respect for others.
Regardless of whether it's warranted, the sight of a firearm in a crowded public place will make people nervous, especially if they do not know the person carrying.
And while some who carry like to think they will be prepared if some monster shoots up a mall, just as many will lack the skills required to assess and deal with a threat while ensuring the safety of the innocent.
Training can sharpen aim and technical skills, but nothing substitutes for experience, judgment, and level-headedness.
In short, training cannot impart common sense.
-- By Matthew Major, on behalf of Public Opinion's editorial board
