Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 43

Thread: Soccer mom targeted for carrying gun to game

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    The only thing here is she was stupid to wear it at a soccer game. Please use common sense and a kid game is not the place. Lack of judgement does not make it illegal



    Soccer mom targeted for carrying gun to game

    LEBANON- A southcentral Pennsylvania woman's concealed-weapons permit has been revoked after other parents complained about seeing her carrying her loaded handgun at her daughter's soccer game.
    Meleanie Hain says she's fighting the revocation by the Lebanon County sheriff.
    Hain told the Lebanon Daily News she's always openly carried a firearm without any problems in the past. She received the revocation notice and a warning from local soccer officials after the Sept. 11 game.
    Soccer coach Charlie Jones says parents were upset by Hain carrying her gun at the game.
    Sheriff Michael DeLeo says openly carrying a weapon to a youth soccer match shows a lack of judgment. DeLeo says he'll restore her permit if a court decides he was wrong.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    ogroup wrote:
    The only thing here is she was stupid to wear it at a soccer game. Please use common sense and a kid game is not the place. Lack of judgement does not make it illegal
    First Time poster, personal insults to OC'ers, questioning the judgement of OC...Sounds like all the makings of a "hit and run" troll.

    ogroup, are you here to learn/discuss OC, or are you just here to try and stir up trouble?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    It is the USA here and just making a statement. So it's not hit and run. So please don't start making remarks about someone using the 1st to free speech.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    ogroup wrote:
    It is the USA here and just making a statement. So it's not hit and run.¬* So please don't start making remarks about someone using the 1st to free speech.
    Great. It is pretty frequent for a new user to make an account here, make a blanket statement insulting OC'ers, and then never be heard from again.

    So why do you think it is bad judgement to carry a gun to a soccer game? Do you think a person doesn't need to defend themselves and their children at a soccer game? Why do you think it was stupid?

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    She can protect conceal as well, before long they will post signsbarring guns and then we won't be able to protect anyone.

    I learned not to draw attention to yourself and still carry conceal and be ready for anything.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    ogroup wrote:
    She can protect conceal as well, before long they will post signs¬*barring guns and then we won't be able to protect anyone.

    I learned not to draw attention to yourself and still carry conceal and be ready for anything.
    Great. Do you understand that this is a website devoted to promoting open carry?
    You did not answer my question. Why shouldn't she OC at a soccer game? Do you believe that she should be able to OC ANYWHERE, or is it just soccer games that are out?
    Open carry can have potential advantages just like conceal carry does. For instance, perhaps she believes that openly carrying a weapon will deter criminals from striking in the first place. That would not be something that conceal carry would do.
    Or maybe it is more comfortable for her to OC, or maybe she can draw much faster when she OC's.
    Regardless of her personal reasons for carrying openly, I think it is insulting to suggest that she is stupid to carry to a soccer game and then not back it up, and just suggest that she is "drawing attention" to herself.
    And your suggestion that if she continues to use her rights, they may stop her seems logically strange. Are you saying people should not use their rights, because someone may take them away? Who cares if they are taken away if you are not using them in the first place.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Herndon, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    336

    Post imported post

    ogroup wrote:
    She can protect conceal as well, before long they will post signsbarring guns and then we won't be able to protect anyone.

    I learned not to draw attention to yourself and still carry conceal and be ready for anything.
    Actually, Pennsylvania, much like our lovely state of Virginia, has preemption concerning firearms laws. That means the local or county lawmakers cannot make laws prohibiting the open or concealed carry of firearms. In fact, a LTCF is not required to OC in Pennsylvania except in the city of Philadelphia.

    You choice to conceal is a valid choice, and is just that: your choice. Many people choose to open carry for various reasons. It is just as valid a choice. What we need to remember is that we are all gun owners and we should be sticking together and supporting each other when someone is harassed/hassled/arrested for legal activity with thier firearms. You may not like someone's choice to OC, but you should respect and support thier right to do so.

    If you are interested in why some folks choose to OC instead of CC, I invite you to check out the "Why Open Carry" section of this forum. There is a lot of discussion on OC motivation and mindset.

    Just my thoughts.

    Peace

    --RedKnightt--

    Zombie Squad has it right: ‚ÄúWe 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.‚ÄĚ



  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    Great. Do you understand that this is a website devoted to promoting open carry?

    YES I do and OC as well

    Why shouldn't she OC at a soccer game?The audience is mixed

    Due to fact she is withsoccer mon & dads, kids, etc that could be anti guns

    Do you believe that she should be able to OC ANYWHERE, or is it just soccer games that are out?

    Yes, I believe you should OC anywhere with judgement. Would you OC to church?

    Regardless of her personal reasons for carrying openly, I think it is insulting to suggest that she is stupid to carry to a soccer game and then not back it up, and just suggest that she is "drawing attention" to herself.


    Maybe the word "stupid" should be substituted better judgement.

    And your suggestion that if she continues to use her rights, they may stop her seems logically strange. Are you saying people should not use their rights, because someone may take them away? Who cares if they are taken away if you are not using them in the first place.

    You could be right but remember the laws can we change and notto our favor. If was not to long ago that the laws were "no guns" they can easily to back tothat ifwe don't watch the gov't.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    Thank you for your insight as well and rights of all of us.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    "Why shouldn't she OC at a soccer game?¬*The audience is mixed Due to fact she is with¬*soccer mon & dads, kids, etc that could be anti guns¬*"

    There could be anti-gun people anywhere. That seems more like a reason to never OC. Maybe some of those anti-gun people would see a mom carrying a gun and see a reason not to fear guns.

    "Yes, I believe you should OC anywhere with judgement. Would you OC to church? "
    If it were legal in my state, of course I would.


    "Maybe the word "stupid" should be substituted better judgement."
    Again, we will just have to disagree, as I don't see a bad judgement call.



    "You could be right but remember the laws can we change and not¬*to our favor. If was not to long ago that the laws were "no guns" they can easily to back to¬*that if¬*we don't watch the gov't.¬*"

    I agree 100%. It is my belief that walking around OCing shows others that they have no need to fear guns. Especially when it is your "typical soccer mom" carrying the gun. The laws can change, but if we have the public opinion on our side, I think it makes things much easier for us.

    I hope you stick around the site and keep reading about the different reasons people have for OCing and the thought process behind it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    I hope for your sake the city's and towns don't make everythings private property. Read the posting about the AMTRAK 30th station. Food forthought. It heading in that direction.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    ogroup wrote:
    I hope for your sake the city's and towns don't make everythings private property. Read the posting about the AMTRAK 30th station. Food forthought. It heading in that direction.
    Folks, let's get off to a better start.

    ogroup, welcome to OCDO! It's great that you are already openly carrying to some extent, and collectively we hope that you stay.

    To hit on some of the points you bring up...

    -Some OCers only OC once in a while, perhaps only for regional meet-ups. Others OC about as often as they CC. Still others OC the vast majority of the time, and it is a way of life for these folks. Once I get my LTCF so that I can carry in a vehicle, I hope to fall into the latter group. Simply, many OCers do so as just part of their regular routine, just as you may wear a certain pair of shoes all the time, or listen to a certain type of music all the the time in your car.

    -Continuing a bit from that, most of us here at OCDO feel that open carry is not a suspicious or hostile behavior. While debates rage on style of carry, the general consensus is that a person with a holstered handgun on his/her belt should be no more offensive than a person with a cell phone on his/her belt. To believe that a gun is some animate being that is inherently more dangerous than said cell phone is generally seen as giving into the hysterics of those who wish to ban all guns for everyone.

    -When OC incidents spark private property owners to put up "no guns" signs, it effectively helps to define pro-gun and anti-gun establishments. If businesses want to put up "no guns" signs, more power to them! Then I know not to patronize them. And, better yet, I don't have to worry about an inevitable open carry incident in that business when I unknowingly walk in with an openly carried handgun.

    -Often the point is brought up that OCing may detract from the rights of CCers. First off, there is no evidence that I've read where an open carry event has led to legislated bans on all forms of carry. Fortunately, Pennsylvania is generally friendly to guns and gun owners and, as such, we enjoy perhaps the fewest restrictions of any state in where we can carry (only secured courthouse areas are off limits in terms of public property, and signs on private property hold no legal weight). So, the risk is negligible at best that irritated soccer moms will convince a pro-gun legislature to exclude all carry in certain places (like parks) where gun owners currently cause no crime. I'd say that for most people offended by the sight of an openly carried gun, the anger is merely an outlet for an inability to comprehend the fact that A) normal people can carry guns and B) more people carry concealed than they used to think. It brings the immediacy of gun carrying into the consciousness of both the hardcore and casual anti-gunner. Before, they were perhaps in the denial stage of people carrying guns... then comes anger, and now we're starting to see collectively bargaining; asking people to cover up, only OC in certain places, etc etc. Maybe next will come depression and hopefully acceptance eventually. In my long-winded way... don't worry about OCers "ruining" CC for everyone. And...

    -Concealed is still always concealed. In practice, concealed carry will always be an option regardless of its legality. The only people who need to worry about the negative effects of the OC movement are those who OC.

    Anyhow, stay around and read a while. :celebrate

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    ogroup wrote:
    I hope for your sake the city's and towns don't make everythings private property. Read the posting about the AMTRAK 30th station. Food for¬*thought. It heading in that direction.
    Personally I wish everything was private property, those people I can deal with by not giving them my money. I don't have that option for "public" property, they take my money wether I want to give it or not. But that whole realm of public vs private gets far into the realm of my individual politics.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cherry Tree (Indiana County), Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,155

    Post imported post

    Cities and municipalities cannot, in any stretch of the imagination, convert public property into private property. And, cities and municipalities cannot in any manner regulate the carrying of firearms. Lastly, even the state legislature could not outlaw OC since it would run counter to Article 1, Section 21 of the state constitution (not that any legislator would dare vote for such).

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    40

    Post imported post

    Sorry, but I travel Amtrak to get back and forth and thiswas posted just recently after a incident at 30th street station in Philadelphia. Never was a problem before the incident.

    I wish you were right, but the problem is you won't be able to move around with weapon eventually.



    OC or CC it won't matter you will not be able to move around or enter in public places at all.

    Just posted to their website



    Amtrak is part of the nation's ground-based transportation system, interconnected at thousands of points across 21,000 route miles. Unlike the airlines, with single points of staffed access, rail systems have multiple points of access. Like most rail systems worldwide, Amtrak shares facilities with commuter rail operations and city transit systems handling millions of daily passengers at hundreds of stations. It is an open system with connectivity and a free flow of large numbers of people between modes.

    Amtrak has in place a range of behind-the-scenes and front-line security measures aimed at improving passenger rail security, some of which are conducted on an unpredictable or random basis.

    Among these security measures, passengers may notice any of the following in stations or aboard trains:


    • Uniformed police officers or Mobile Security Teams
    • Random passenger and carry-on baggage screening
    • K-9 units
    • Checked baggage screening
    • On-board security checks
    • Identification checks

    For several years, Amtrak has increased patrols by its police officers at its major stations and other facilities, including patrols by K-9 detection teams. In February 2008, Amtrak deployed Mobile Security Teams to patrol stations and trains on an undisclosed, unpredictable basis. They also conduct random screening of passengers and inspection of their carry-on items and patrol trains. These teams consist of specially trained uniformed Amtrak Police, special counter-terrorism agents and K-9 units. Because predictable security can be exploited, the unpredictable rotation of the Mobile Security Teams adds to their ability to deter and detect potential threats.

    Ticket agents are required to ask passengers for photo I.D. when purchasing tickets. The company has also reminded its nearly 19,000 employees to remain vigilant and to report suspicious activity.

    Since a 2004 Security Directive from the U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA), Amtrak has carried out additional passenger identification procedures through a random ticket verification process.

    Each carry-on bag must be visibly tagged with the name and address of the passenger. Passengers may use their own personal identification tags, or may obtain Amtrak baggage identification tags at station ticket offices, or onboard trains from a member of the train crew. For the safety and comfort of our passengers, we strictly enforce the baggage limits and encourage all passengers to read these guidelines, which are also posted on Amtrak.com or printed in timetables.

    The following kinds of items are prohibited as both checked and carry-on baggage:


    • Any type of gun, firearm, ammunition, explosives, or weapon.
    • Incendiaries, including flammable gases, liquids and fuels.
    • Large, sharp objects such as axes, ice picks and swords.
    • Corrosive or dangerous chemicals or materials, such as liquid bleach, tear gas, mace, radioactive and harmful bacteriological materials.
    • Batteries with acid that can spill or leak (except those batteries used in motorized wheelchairs or similar devices for mobility-impaired passengers).
    • Club-like items, such as billy clubs and nightsticks.
    • Fragile and/or valuable items (including but not limited to electronic equipment).
    • Animals (except service animals).
    • Oversized and/or overweight items.




  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    ogroup wrote:
    Sorry, but I travel Amtrak to get back and forth and this¬*was posted just recently after a incident at 30th street station in Philadelphia. Never was a problem before the incident.

    I wish you were right, but the problem is you won't be able to move around with weapon eventually.
    OC or CC¬* it won't matter you will not be able to move around or enter in public places at all.¬*
    I understand what you are saying, I fully support any private business to ban guns, or anything else on their private property. They will not get my business, but ohwell.
    Now, you think that somehow all businesses will want to ban guns. You may be right, I just don't think you are. I think some smart pro-firearm person would see the demand for a business that allows firearms, and would choose to compete. So, I never see the problem of not being able to "move around". Of course, the current world isn't quite like that, for example Amtrak gets subsidized by the government, so there is no possible competition, so I can see the problem you are having.
    That is why I wish everything really was "private" not public, or "semi-private but getting government assistance".

    Regardless of all this, to me, OCing is a way to make the public understand that firearms being carried by responsible citizens are NOT scary and are NOT a problem.
    And OCing shows businesses that there are customers who will spend money, who are also gun owners. With current economic situations, it would seem like businesses owners would prefer to not alienate potential customers. With concealed carry, those business owners never see that they have money spending patrons who have firearms, and will have less of a problem saying "no guns".

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    ogroup wrote:
    Sorry, but I travel Amtrak to get back and forth and thiswas posted just recently after a incident at 30th street station in Philadelphia. Never was a problem before the incident.

    I wish you were right, but the problem is you won't be able to move around with weapon eventually.

    OC or CC it won't matter you will not be able to move around or enter in public places at all.
    Well... signs carry no legal weight in Pennsylvania. So you're not being restricted in any way now that the 30th street station is posted. You can continue to carry concealed on private property, and you can openly carry so long as you're not asked to leave... in which case you must leave or be charged with defiant trespass. Regardless, nothing has changed, it's just that the station has posted its policy instead of just having it in writing.

    Now, the question is whether the station is a public or private entity. If private, they can have such a policy. If public, though, they must allow both CC and OC per state preemption.

    And... refer to my above post in this thread

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    Well... signs carry no legal weight in Pennsylvania. So you're not being restricted in any way now that the 30th street station is posted. You can continue to carry concealed on private property, and you can openly carry so long as you're not asked to leave... in which case you must leave or be charged with defiant trespass. Regardless, nothing has changed, it's just that the station has posted its policy instead of just having it in writing.
    This is an interesting situation, if the TSA has been given authority to operate on Amtrak, which from the limited research I have seen it has, I would be willing to bet those signs may very well have legal weight. Someone who knows more about what legal authority the TSA operates under, and what federal statutes they could use to limit handguns on Amtrak needs to chime in.

    **edited to add**

    Looking into this more, just confuses me.

    http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title5a/5a_2_.html

    "the term "designated Federal entity" means Amtrak, ...... ... and the United States Postal Service;

    So I know Amtrak is a federally created and controlled corporation, does that make them federal property? or Not?



  19. #19
    Regular Member lprgcFrank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wayne, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    Sorry but the Amtrak document you cite is not new - you have never been able to take a firearm on Amtrak trains.

  20. #20
    Regular Member jahwarrior72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Nizzy EEzzy in da Pizzy
    Posts
    388

    Post imported post

    ogroup wrote:
    It is the USA here and just making a statement. So it's not hit and run. So please don't start making remarks about someone using the 1st to free speech.
    1A doesn't apply to forums. you can be edited as much as the mods like. just thought you should know.
    Givin' up the tactical advantage since 2008.

    Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

  21. #21
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    Why, specifically, is OC at a soccer game "stupid"?

    Why is "better judgement", and of what, needed?

    OC has brought about tons of positive change. Hiding our guns has gotten us nothing. But you're entitled to your opinion



  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    mkl wrote:
    imperialism2024 wrote:
    Well... signs carry no legal weight in Pennsylvania. So you're not being restricted in any way now that the 30th street station is posted. You can continue to carry concealed on private property, and you can openly carry so long as you're not asked to leave... in which case you must leave or be charged with defiant trespass. Regardless, nothing has changed, it's just that the station has posted its policy instead of just having it in writing.
    This is an interesting situation, if the TSA has been given authority to operate on Amtrak, which from the limited research I have seen it has, I would be willing to bet those signs may very well have legal weight. Someone who knows more about what legal authority the TSA operates under, and what federal statutes they could use to limit handguns on Amtrak needs to chime in.

    **edited to add**

    Looking into this more, just confuses me.

    http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title5a/5a_2_.html

    "the term "designated Federal entity" means Amtrak, ...... ... and the United States Postal Service;

    So I know Amtrak is a federally created and controlled corporation, does that make them federal property? or Not?
    Well, I had heard that Amtrak fell under the jurisdiction of the District of Columbia, and thus guns were banned (and had been banned for some time) by law, not by policy. But I don't have a citation for that, unfortunately. And I had been led to believe that Amtrak is a private entity...

  23. #23
    Regular Member lprgcFrank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wayne, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    245

    Post imported post

    Amtrak claims that they are private property - details in this thread

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum46/12963.html

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri, ,
    Posts
    79

    Post imported post

    Another one of those whiners that believe that they have all rights to the 1st amendment but that we should make concessions on the 2nd amendment and keep it concealed at all times to placate the soccer mommies and pantie wetters.

    ogroup wrote:
    It is the USA here and just making a statement. So it's not hit and run. So please don't start making remarks about someone using the 1st to free speech.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    And I had been led to believe that Amtrak is a private entity...
    The line is blurred so much in these weird situations, that I am not sure what the difference between private/public is. Amtrak was created by the federal government, the president appoints their board of directors, all of the Amtrak preferred stock is owned by the federal government, and Amtrak is mentioned in the USC as a "federal entity".
    But, do they qualify as "federal property"? And even if they don't, if the TSA has authority to implement rules like "No Guns", that would overrule the PA state laws anyway.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •