PA Soccer mom has her CHL revoked for legally open carrying!

imported post

A woman in Pennsylvania named Meleanie, who posts on PAFOA.org as "shefearsnothing", just had her CHL revoked. She was legally OCing at her child's soccer game in a public park, for which a CHL is not even required!

Here is the initial contact from the director of the soccer league.

Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:12:40 -0400 (EDT)
From: soccernf@wavecrazy.net
Subject: LRYS Letter to behavior at U-6 game 11 Sep 08
X-Originating-IP: [68.164.121.121]
To: [REDACTED]
Cc: parkdaves@comcast.net, short777@verizon.net

Meleanie Hain,

Lebanon Recreation Youth Soccer has been advised of your inappropriate behavior at LRYS U-6 game on Thursday, 11 September 2009. Not only did your behavior scare the children but the coaches and parents were unsettled, especially on this date. A responsible adult would realize that such behavior has no place at a soccer game.

LRYS advised you that firearms, unless carried by an on-duty law enforcement officer are not permitted at any soccer practices, games or events. LRYS considers this a warning letter and any further incident will result in you being banned from that and any further LRYS soccer games or events for the balance of the season. In addition Lebanon City Police Department will be advised of your actions and this previous warning.

Nigel Foundling
Director
Lebanon Recreational Youth Soccer

Click to expand...

Well, he did report her to the authorities... And the Sheriff revoked her CHL on the grounds of questionable character.

link to PAFOA thread with more details:

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed-open-carry-121/32796-ltcf-revoked.html

copy of letter:

imported post

I wouldn't worry for her. Any slightly compentent lawyer is going to win a lot for her...

imported post

If you hear how this turns out, please post again in this thread. I'd love to hear what happens (being raised in PA myself) but have a hard enough time keeping up (well, mostly keeping up) with this forum, let alone another one.

imported post

Rest assured you haven't heard the end of this. Discussion and such is going hot and heavy on the Pennsylvania Firearms Owners dot Org (PAFOA.org) website. To say that PAFOA members are outraged would be an understatement.

Soccer practice was being held in a public park, which means any local prohibitions were preempted by state law. The soccer league was only using the park, so it was still public property, which means the soccer league couldn't prohibit firearms carry.

Both letters and e-mails have been going hot and heavy to the sheriff concerned, state representatives, state senators, and a few others, too.

The last time something like this happened gun owners from across the state showed up at the county court house to show their support. Since firearms are prohibited in court houses, the deputies there had their work cut out for them as they checked in everyone's handgun (they're required to provide storage facilities).

Bottom line? Open carry is legal throughout the state, and that's supported by two state supreme court decisions.

imported post

Here is the original post here on OCDO:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum46/16397.html

and the second thread after the first was closed for some reason:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum66/16426.html

This is a link to the summary thread on PAFOA:

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/conceale...rsnothing-s-revocation-legal-info-thread.html

And the original thread on PAFOA:

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed-open-carry-121/32796-ltcf-revoked.html

Aso, JChen012, when you copied my original post, you changed LTCF to CHL, which is incorrect. Pennsylvania does not issue a CHL, they issue a License To Carry a Firearm. The LTCF does not require you to carry concealed, allow it does permit that. Many OCers have one so they may transport a loaded weapon on thier person in a vehicle, for which a LTCF is needed.

As a nettiquete point, if you're going to quote someone else's post, please have the courtesy to attribute the post to the original poster.

--RedKnightt--

Zombie Squad has it right: “We hold fast to the belief that if you are prepared for a scenario where the walking corpses of your family and neighbors are trying to eat you alive, you will be prepared for almost anything.”

imported post

My apologies RedKnightt. I actually copied it from another forum and that forum member had used CHL. Anyhow I am not making any excuses. I was just so mad reading about this incident that I totally forgot to give credit to the original poster. Again, my apologies.

imported post

We're all allies here. Mike Stollenwerk made one point very clear: Think of OpenCarry.org as a NATO. An attack on one of us for lawfully open carry is an attack on us all, everywhere.

imported post

Here's the newspaper report: http://www.ldnews.com/lebanonnews/ci_10545914

imported post

jchen012 wrote:

My apologies RedKnightt. I actually copied it from another forum and that forum member had used CHL. Anyhow I am not making any excuses. I was just so mad reading about this incident that I totally forgot to give credit to the original poster. Again, my apologies.

Click to expand...

Not a problem, I appreciate the apology. What forum did you see this on? I've seen it here, on PAFOA.org, and on AR-15.com.

--RedKnightt--

Zombie Squad has it right: “We hold fast to the belief that if you are prepared for a scenario where the walking corpses of your family and neighbors are trying to eat you alive, you will be prepared for almost anything.”

imported post

What would be the odds of getting a court order (or stay) staying the revocation pending some kind of judicial review? Seems that would be one way to fight the process...at least in the short term.

Any legal eagles out there...?

imported post

RedKnightt wrote:

Not a problem, I appreciate the apology. What forum did you see this on? I've seen it here, on PAFOA.org, and on AR-15.com.

Click to expand...

I first saw this on SigForum.com, then it started popping up everywhere else.

imported post

http://www.timesleader.com/news/Toting_gun_at_soccer_costs_mom_her_permit_09-24-2008.html

Here is an article about it... Funny thing is what the Sheriff had to say...

imported post

So her reputation and character was such that she would likely act in a dangerous manor to public safety? Man! That they got all that from “Director,
Lebanon Recreational Youth Soccer” warning[/quote] letter?

They assumed bad character and reputation of person based on this? Weird community! I would think they would need more than this one thing to tarnish one's character and reputation.

I'm not that smart of a guy but are they judging her choice to exercise her rights?


“DeLeo cited a section of state law that bars the issuance of concealed-weapons permits to people who are deemed a danger to public safety based on their character and reputation. Hain showed poor judgment by wearing her gun at the game, he said”

Reputation is the opinion (more technically, a social evaluation) of the public toward a person, a group of people, or an organization.

character is an evaluation of an individual's moral qualities. The concept of character can imply a variety of attributes including the existence or lack of virtues such as integrity, courage, fortitude, honesty, and loyalty, or of good behaviors or habits.

Choice consists of the mental process of thinking involved with the process of judging the merits of multiple options and selecting one of them for action.

In formulating cognitive judgments, a formal process of evaluation applies. A judgment may be expressed as a statement, e.g. S1: 'A is B' and is usually the outcome of an evaluation of alternatives. The formal process of evaluation can sometimes be described as a set of conditions and criteria that must be satisfied in order for a judgment to be made. What follows is a suggestive list of some conditions that are commonly required:

• there must be corroborating evidence for S1,
• there must be no true contradicting statements,
• if there are contradicting statements, these must be outweighed by the corroborating evidence for S1, or
• contradicting statements must themselves have no corroborating evidence
• S1 must also corroborate and be corroborated by the system of statements which are accepted as true.

imported post

Lonnie Wilson wrote:

We're all allies here. Mike Stollenwerk made one point very clear: Think of OpenCarry.org as a NATO. An attack on one of us for lawfully open carry is an attack on us all, everywhere.

Click to expand...

Very well put.

imported post

If such a lofty official as an actual Sheriff believes that her reputation is impeached by a letter from the Soccer League, perhaps she should sue the League for defamation of character.

And perhaps the Sheriff is colluding in this defamation, since he claims her character is such that it justifies an official action...

imported post

I'd be so tempted to write a "Go f yourself, I'm not turning my CPL in, what are you going to do about it, punk?" letter to the sheriff. But then I've never been known for handling gross abuses of law by public officials all that well... I told my city I wasn't going to pay their $50 fine for not licensing my 3 pound dog that never leaves my house, which the city discovered by sending college students door to door to actually peek into people's windows. In my case they approached my five year old daughter as my wife was strapping her into a car seat in the driveway and said, "Hi sweetie. Do you have a puppy?" Of course she said yes and then the threats and paperwork were pulled out.

When I refused to pay, they threatened a $10,000 lien and a forceful, police seizure of my home and property. Not kidding you at all. I caved and paid the fine. Should have told them to go ahead, draw guns on my wife and children and physically force us out of the home we own for not paying a $50 fine over a dog smaller than the average guinea pig. But I think they would have done it. That was when I realized the America I thought I lived in is a fantasy and in real life, the rulemakers don't have to adhere to their own laws and can do whatever they damn well please - as we see here.

I hope she wins enough money that these people never pull this crap again, or are subsequently terminated for violating state law. I have zero respect for cops, especially sheriffs, who blatantly violate the law, intentionally bending it's meanings to target innocent citizens.

imported post

tricityguy wrote:

I hope she wins enough money that these people never pull this crap again, or are subsequently terminated for violating state law. I have zero respect for cops, especially sheriffs, who blatantly violate the law, intentionally bending it's meanings to target innocent citizens.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately that money will once again come from the tax payers, but there is no doubt she is winning this one.

I definitly agree with pursing legal recourse against this soccer league.

They have no right to try and enforce their own opinions against a parent watching their kids play at a PUBLIC sporting facility. Than to send a notice to the police department... Definitly dirty of that organization.

imported post

come on she only shot 3 people! oh wait she was only carrying a gun. I'd tell the sheriff to go f*** himself, carrying a gun does not make you likely to act in a dangerous manner. that guy should loose his job at least

imported post

scoobydoo6906 wrote:

come on she only shot 3 people! oh wait she was only carrying a gun. I'd tell the sheriff to go f*** himself, carrying a gun does not make you likely to act in a dangerous manner. that guy should loose his job at least

Click to expand...

But he won't. Nothing will happen from this, except for maybe a little settlement that the taxpayers will fund.

imported post

scoobydoo6906 wrote:

come on she only shot 3 people! oh wait she was only carrying a gun. I'd tell the sheriff to go f*** himself, carrying a gun does not make you likely to act in a dangerous manner. that guy should loose his job at least

Click to expand...

Deleoprobably got a bit of a headache over it but I bet he has enough support by the ignorant sheeplesthat hefeels that overall he was correct in his actions. Unfortunately, I bet nothing significant happens.