Pennsylvania Sheriff Seeks Dismissal Of $1 Million Federal Lawsuit Brought By Meleanie Hain

This thread turned idiotic fast. :quirky

Click to expand...

News Release December 26, 2008:

Attorneys for Lebanon County (PA) Sheriff Michael J. DeLeo today moved to dismiss a $1 million federal lawsuit brought by Meleanie Hain and her husband, asserting that the suit has no legal basis and should be thrown out.

Hain claims she is entitled to $1 million in damages, including “emotional distress” and loss of babysitting clients, after Sheriff DeLeo revoked her license to carry a concealed firearm following complaints from parents that Hain posed a danger to the community by openly carrying a loaded semiautomatic firearm to her 5-year-old’s soccer games. Hain’s husband is also seeking damages, claiming that the sheriff’s actions caused him to lose the “companionship, consortium, society and services” of his wife, according to the Hain’s complaint filed in the case.

Click to expand...

Repeater wrote:

News Release December 26, 2008:

Attorneys for Lebanon County (PA) Sheriff Michael J. DeLeo today moved to dismiss a $1 million federal lawsuit brought by Meleanie Hain and her husband, asserting that the suit has no legal basis and should be thrown out.

Hain claims she is entitled to $1 million in damages, including “emotional distress” and loss of babysitting clients, after Sheriff DeLeo revoked her license to carry a concealed firearm following complaints from parents that Hain posed a danger to the community by openly carrying a loaded semiautomatic firearm to her 5-year-old’s soccer games. Hain’s husband is also seeking damages, claiming that the sheriff’s actions caused him to lose the “companionship, consortium, society and services” of his wife, according to the Hain’s complaint filed in the case.

Click to expand...

OK, let me play the bad guy.

Does she deserve monetary compensation for violation of her civil rights? Yes. Does she deserve her permit back? Absolutely, yes.

But $1 million?

That must represent the largest babysitting clientele ever amassed by one woman in history.

And the idea of her husband suing for damages, when he wasn't even a party, sounds totally bogus. What "companionship" and "services" did he lose? Did his wife leave him over this? What nonsense.

This is a perfect example of what makes the civil courts in America utterly disgusting. And of course, the attorneys will probably take 50% if they win.

Click to expand...

Repeater wrote:

News Release December 26, 2008:

Attorneys for Lebanon County (PA) Sheriff Michael J. DeLeo today moved to dismiss a $1 million federal lawsuit brought by Meleanie Hain and her husband, asserting that the suit has no legal basis and should be thrown out.

Hain claims she is entitled to $1 million in damages, including “emotional distress” and loss of babysitting clients, after Sheriff DeLeo revoked her license to carry a concealed firearm following complaints from parents that Hain posed a danger to the community by openly carrying a loaded semiautomatic firearm to her 5-year-old’s soccer games. Hain’s husband is also seeking damages, claiming that the sheriff’s actions caused him to lose the “companionship, consortium, society and services” of his wife, according to the Hain’s complaint filed in the case.

Click to expand...

OK, let me play the bad guy.

Does she deserve monetary compensation for violation of her civil rights? Yes. Does she deserve her permit back? Absolutely, yes.

But $1 million?

That must represent the largest babysitting clientele ever amassed by one woman in history.

And the idea of her husband suing for damages, when he wasn't even a party, sounds totally bogus. What "companionship" and "services" did he lose? Did his wife leave him over this? What nonsense.

This is a perfect example of what makes the civil courts in America utterly disgusting. And of course, the attorneys will probably take 50% if they win.

Click to expand...

OK, let me play the bad guy.

Does she deserve monetary compensation for violation of her civil rights? Yes. Does she deserve her permit back? Absolutely, yes.

But $1 million?

That must represent the largest babysitting clientele ever amassed by one woman in history.

And the idea of her husband suing for damages, when he wasn't even a party, sounds totally bogus. What "companionship" and "services" did he lose? Did his wife leave him over this? What nonsense.

This is a perfect example of what makes the civil courts in America utterly disgusting. And of course, the attorneys will probably take 50% if they win.

Click to expand...

News Release December 26, 2008:

Attorneys for Lebanon County (PA) Sheriff Michael J. DeLeo today moved to dismiss a $1 million federal lawsuit brought by Meleanie Hain and her husband, asserting that the suit has no legal basis and should be thrown out.

Hain claims she is entitled to $1 million in damages, including “emotional distress” and loss of babysitting clients, after Sheriff DeLeo revoked her license to carry a concealed firearm following complaints from parents that Hain posed a danger to the community by openly carrying a loaded semiautomatic firearm to her 5-year-old’s soccer games. Hain’s husband is also seeking damages, claiming that the sheriff’s actions caused him to lose the “companionship, consortium, society and services” of his wife, according to the Hain’s complaint filed in the case.

Hain stated in a Dec. 12, 2008, Philadelphia Inquirer article that she openly carries a loaded semiautomatic handgun because, “I don’t really need anything extra in the way of the gun if I’m going to have to pull it out and I’m holding a baby and trying to shuttle two or three other kids.”

The Legal Action Project of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence is providing free legal assistance to Sheriff DeLeo. “It should be obvious to anyone that a civilian bringing an openly-carried, loaded semiautomatic weapon to a child’s soccer game poses a grave risk to the community,” said Daniel R. Vice, Senior Attorney at the Brady Center’s Legal Action Project.

The Brady Center supports common sense gun policies that protect children and communities from gun violence. Every day, eight children and teens are shot and killed by a firearm and 48 more are wounded. Firearms are the second-leading cause of death (after motor vehicle accidents) for young people ages 1-19 in the U.S. Persons carrying loaded guns in public have repeatedly been involved in shootings, including accidental shootings of innocent bystanders. Studies show that laws allowing the carrying of concealed firearms have not reduced crime and, if anything, have increased violent crime, including murder and robbery.

After Hain filed the lawsuit, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence offered to provide free legal assistance to Sheriff DeLeo. DeLeo is represented by David L. Schwalm and Scott D. McCarroll of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Attorneys with the Brady Center’s Legal Action Project plan to assist DeLeo’s counsel throughout the case. The motion to dismiss was filed today in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

Click to expand...

Repeater wrote:

News Release December 26, 2008:

Attorneys for Lebanon County (PA) Sheriff Michael J. DeLeo today moved to dismiss a $1 million federal lawsuit brought by Meleanie Hain and her husband, asserting that the suit has no legal basis and should be thrown out.

Hain claims she is entitled to $1 million in damages, including “emotional distress” and loss of babysitting clients, after Sheriff DeLeo revoked her license to carry a concealed firearm following complaints from parents that Hain posed a danger to the community by openly carrying a loaded semiautomatic firearm to her 5-year-old’s soccer games.  Hain’s husband is also seeking damages, claiming that the sheriff’s actions caused him to lose the “companionship, consortium, society and services” of his wife, according to the Hain’s complaint filed in the case.

Hain stated in a Dec. 12, 2008, Philadelphia Inquirer article that she openly carries a loaded semiautomatic handgun because, “I don’t really need anything extra in the way of the gun if I’m going to have to pull it out and I’m holding a baby and trying to shuttle two or three other kids.”

The Legal Action Project of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence is providing free legal assistance to Sheriff DeLeo.  “It should be obvious to anyone that a civilian bringing an openly-carried, loaded semiautomatic weapon to a child’s soccer game poses a grave risk to the community,” said Daniel R. Vice, Senior Attorney at the Brady Center’s Legal Action Project. 

The Brady Center supports common sense gun policies that protect children and communities from gun violence.  Every day, eight children and teens are shot and killed by a firearm and 48 more are wounded.  Firearms are the second-leading cause of death (after motor vehicle accidents) for young people ages 1-19 in the U.S.  Persons carrying loaded guns in public have repeatedly been involved in shootings, including accidental shootings of innocent bystanders.  Studies show that laws allowing the carrying of concealed firearms have not reduced crime and, if anything, have increased violent crime, including murder and robbery.

After Hain filed the lawsuit, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence offered to provide free legal assistance to Sheriff DeLeo.  DeLeo is represented by David L. Schwalm and Scott D. McCarroll of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.  Attorneys with the Brady Center’s Legal Action Project plan to assist DeLeo’s counsel throughout the case.  The motion to dismiss was filed today in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

Click to expand...

So in a single year... 2,920 children and teens are killed by guns and another 17,520 are wounded by guns.

Click to expand...

darthmord wrote:

Repeater wrote:

News Release December 26, 2008:

[snip]
The Brady Center supports common sense gun policies that protect children and communities from gun violence. Every day, eight children and teens are shot and killed by a firearm and 48 more are wounded. Firearms are the second-leading cause of death (after motor vehicle accidents) for young people ages 1-19 in the U.S. Persons carrying loaded guns in public have repeatedly been involved in shootings, including accidental shootings of innocent bystanders. Studies show that laws allowing the carrying of concealed firearms have not reduced crime and, if anything, have increased violent crime, including murder and robbery.

[snip]

Click to expand...

So in a single year... 2,920 children and teens are killed by guns and another 17,520 are wounded by guns.

Click to expand...

B.S.

Those "children and teens" include, and are thus predominantly composed of, gangbangers who also happen to be legal minors. The namesake of the term "infantry". These are not the "children" whose protection is implicitly invoked by the Brady Bunch.

Homicide is homicide.

If you want to address how dangerous guns are to kids -- you know, the kind that go to school with your own children -- the figures for accidental deaths of children by firearm are far more revealing. In 2005, 75 children were killed accidentally by firearms in the US.

Halt the presses! We have an epidemic on our hands! :what:


:lol:

Click to expand...

The Brady Center supports common sense gun policies that protect children and communities from gun violence. Every day, eight children and teens are shot and killed by a firearm and 48 more are wounded. Firearms are the second-leading cause of death (after motor vehicle accidents) for young people ages 1-19 in the U.S. Persons carrying loaded guns in public have repeatedly been involved in shootings, including accidental shootings of innocent bystanders.

Click to expand...

News Release December 26, 2008:

Attorneys for Lebanon County (PA) Sheriff Michael J. DeLeo today moved to dismiss a $1 million federal lawsuit brought by Meleanie Hain and her husband, asserting that the suit has no legal basis and should be thrown out.

Click to expand...

Great to hear from you Melanie. Hope you're doing well and not too stressed over any of this.

I see nothing wrong with $1 million. I'm sure you're not going to get that much, but it's not a point of how much YOU are going to get, but how much THEY have to PAY in retribution for their screw up.

I hope that if it's a sizable enough award that you can find some way to use the money to help OC and gun rights in general. Maybe start an OC Defense fund, grants to low-income people for purchasing firearms and training. If you could dosomething positive with at least some of the money for rights in general that can do some good on a personal level.

I realize it's jumping the gun considerably (you haven't won nothin' yet), but I've thought about it and I know that's what I would do if I won a lawsuitover a rights violation.

...After I paid off all my bills and "enhanced" my firearms collection, of course ...
...Orygunner...

Click to expand...

Orygunner wrote:

Great to hear from you Melanie. Hope you're doing well and not too stressed over any of this.

I see nothing wrong with $1 million. I'm sure you're not going to get that much, but it's not a point of how much YOU are going to get, but how much THEY have to PAY in retribution for their screw up.

I hope that if it's a sizable enough award that you can find some way to use the money to help OC and gun rights in general. Maybe start an OC Defense fund, grants to low-income people for purchasing firearms and training. If you could dosomething positive with at least some of the money for rights in general that can do some good on a personal level.

I realize it's jumping the gun considerably (you haven't won nothin' yet), but I've thought about it and I know that's what I would do if I won a lawsuitover a rights violation.

...After I paid off all my bills and "enhanced" my firearms collection, of course ...
...Orygunner...

Click to expand...

One of MY frustrations is others spending the money that is NOT theirs!!!!

Melanie, from my perspective when all is said and done.... Spend YOUR money in any way you choose.

JoeSparky

Click to expand...

JoeSparky wrote:

Orygunner wrote:

Great to hear from you Melanie. Hope you're doing well and not too stressed over any of this.

I see nothing wrong with $1 million. I'm sure you're not going to get that much, but it's not a point of how much YOU are going to get, but how much THEY have to PAY in retribution for their screw up.

I hope that if it's a sizable enough award that you can find some way to use the money to help OC and gun rights in general. Maybe start an OC Defense fund, grants to low-income people for purchasing firearms and training. If you could dosomething positive with at least some of the money for rights in general that can do some good on a personal level.

I realize it's jumping the gun considerably (you haven't won nothin' yet), but I've thought about it and I know that's what I would do if I won a lawsuitover a rights violation.

...After I paid off all my bills and "enhanced" my firearms collection, of course ...
...Orygunner...

Click to expand...

One of MY frustrations is others spending the money that is NOT theirs!!!!

Melanie, from my perspective when all is said and done.... Spend YOUR money in any way you choose.

JoeSparky

Click to expand...

So far that makes two votes for Melanie to "spend her money how she wants" including onewith asuggestion for how she might further the cause of gun ownership and Open Carry if she happens to have money left over.

Hmm. If she wins the lawsuit, I might have to start a poll. This could be a fun discussion.

No sense jumping the gun though... A win is quite a ways away... hang in there Melanie!
...Orygunner...

Click to expand...

Repeater wrote:

The Brady Center supports common sense gun policies that protect children and communities from gun violence. Every day, eight children and teens are shot and killed by a firearm and 48 more are wounded. Firearms are the second-leading cause of death (after motor vehicle accidents) for young people ages 1-19 in the U.S. Persons carrying loaded guns in public have repeatedly been involved in shootings, including accidental shootings of innocent bystanders.

Click to expand...

News Flash:

Brady Campaign for the Prevention of Motor Vehicle Accidents is seeking to have the following bills passed by the 111th Congress: ban civilian purchase of all motor vehicles used originally by the military, ban all motor vehicles that can run more than 15 mph, ban all motor vehicles that can seat more than 4 people, increase gasoline tax by 500%, make car manufacturers liable for motor accidents involving their car models, register all other motor vehicles, have a safety device such as steering immobilization device for cars parked at your home, and civilians cannot drive their motor vehicles in the presence of children. Motor vehicle drivers driving in public roads have been repeatedly involved in accidents involving innocent bystanders.


:banghead::banghead::banghead:

Click to expand...