Sheriff illegally takes away a Glock 26 from a Soccer Mom!

[xd9fan]

I don't follow your comment. What did she do wrong, if the law allows open carry I don't see how she is making a statement of any kind. I believe the police were trying to make a statement and should recieve a public reprimanded for doing so.

since when did following the law become "making a statement"

sounds like the LEO picked on the wrong mom. You go Girl. From one CC holder to the next.....THANKS!!!

[JohnH1963]

If I was wondering around town outside of closed businesses peering into windows at 3am in the morning when no one else is around then I would not be breaking the law, but it would be somewhat suspicious. No one is out at that time and why am I peering into windows of closed businesses. It would be acceptable for the police to stop and question me as to what I was doing even though I was engaging in legal behavior.

In the same way, if you have a pistol hanging by your side on the streets of a populated area or around some children, then I believe its acceptable for the police to question that behavior. Most people open carry out on farms, prairies on hikes or other rural places to protect against wild animals. You dont see too many people open carrying around populated areas.

Although her behavior is legal, I believe there is some justification for at least a short detention and checking id.

The Sheriff was in the wrong by going the hostile route and yanking the permit. A kind request not to bring it to the games would have made a more logical first step and might have produced the desired results.

[Shorts]

It's not about hypotheticals or the justifications for the Terry Stop. The suit is about them trampling her due process rights when the Sheriff revoked her permit.

The Sheriff was in the wrong by going the hostile route and yanking the permit. A kind request not to bring it to the games would have made a more logical first step and might have produced the desired results.
Today 05:19 PM

There is a papertrail of communication from the time of the soccer game to the Sheriff pulling the permit. Again, that information is not in this thread but it has been covered in this case.

[B.N.Real]

Open carry is not a "in your face" statement.

As a matter of fact,many people do not like that fact that they have to go in front of a judge and beg to get a concealed carry license that still has numerous restrictions to it.

People that open carry know they will make people that have been conditioned by the media to fear guns,uncomfortable.

That is not their doing.

And to make a statement that people who open carry are 'yahoos' and that they are " hurting what 'WE' stand for" is the kind of statement that would make any Anti gunner proud.

That is EXACTLY how they think.

If it is legal,it is legal.

Being legal,carried respondsibly (i.e.,holstered, ready to go and not waving it around at no threat people like a mad person) means you DO NOT have to ask ANYONE FOR THE RIGHT TO OPEN CARRY WHERE IT IS LEGAL.

Just because you don't like it,does'nt mean you have the right to take the handgun from her side.

Whether you are a poster here or a sheriff there.

Remember this well.

Those that restrict gun rights for some,damn well will restrict gun rights for all,some day.

Worldwide that's already the case.

[Musketeer]

Open carry IS an "in your face" statement and if one cannot see that then they are just plain wrong. It is an in your face statement to the vast majority of the public. In addition while I do not have a problem with lawful ccw at a kid's sporting event OC is nothing but inflamatory in the era where psycho parents get into fistfights over a bad call. Having that gun on her hip exposed could easily be seen by a reasonable person as a statement made to intimidate the ref or others.

The woman is an idiot.

[Fox1]

A bit of a drift from the original thread but someone posted this earlier:

Criminals don't acknowledge "gun free" zones. So I don't either.

I, myself, do not like "gun free" zones and I feel they are just setting people up to be attacked when they are defenseless.

Not trying to pick a fight but if someone refuses to acknowledge a "gun free" zone, I.E. carrying a gun into that zone despite signs/notices not to, then that person is breaking the law and becomes a criminal too.

[Csspecs]

I have to agree that even if it was legal it was in poor taste. She had a CC permit that she could have been using... Instead she did this to stir the pot.

It is interesting to note that she did not have any problems at the game so no one really felt threatened enough to call... They just emailed their whining in later.

[bojack2575]

This post may sound like a joke, but I wish that it were like the old west where everyone had a gun and whore it, I bet there would be less crime.

[tranks]

He didn't.

oh, i thought i read somewhere that he took her gun too. i must of misread something.

The interview in the link here is not the first, or the second...Isn't even the 3rd interview she's done on this matter. Considering you're not aware of the entire saga, I'm willing say you have no real idea what affect "this lady" is having on 2A rights....

sorry, i've only seen whats been posted in this thread.

i was just saying, in the one interview, that her short and simple answers to the questions were not helping one of the stereo types that the anti's group us in. i think she should have thought out her answers a little better. (you can pretty well assume in advance that they are going to asked these types of questions, they do it in every story)

do you have links to the other interviews and news stories?

[blackhawk45]

As stated before. OPEN CARRY IS LEGAL IN THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA. and she was just exercising her rights !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pappy John]

Gun owners in Pennsylvania walk a fine line. It's a state that has relatively good laws in terms of freedom to carry and a Uniform Firearms Act that keeps municipalities from making their own, more draconian, rules against posession and carry.

At the same time this state is turning "bluer" all the time, and when incidents happen that give anti gunners an excuse to call our lawmakers attention to making revision to our current rules, I cringe.

In the past they would have gotten short shrift, but when I see our demographics changing and the politics in our state drifting to the left, I'd rather not see anyone opening up opportunities for public debate on current laws. I know where I stand on this issue. I vote and preach pro gun rights, but I fear that I'm finding myself in a minority statewide and will end up losing the rights I have now. It wonders me every time I read the statewide election results. Where the hell are all these liberals coming from.

It's better not to be "in your face" in this environment. It doesn't matter how strongly I feel if the majority is going the other way. Helping to create a debate on the current status of the law, which open carry does, could end up biting us in the ass.

[dieselone]

Having read all 3 pages of this; I'd lean more towards the quote below than the majority that say otherwise. Open carry is "legal" here in WI only because it is not illegal. No one does it because it is common knowledge that the cops will arrest a person OC'ing for SOMETHING. And take the weapon. Good luck getting it back. No such thing as CC permit of any kind in WI. A store owner was cited for CC in his store and the State Supreme Court ruled in his favor. That's about as good as it gets here.

A shame that a lot of otherwise pro-gun people get nervous when someone OC's. This venue seems a lot more "sheepish" than some other I frequent.


"Open carry is not a "in your face" statement.

As a matter of fact,many people do not like that fact that they have to go in front of a judge and beg to get a concealed carry license that still has numerous restrictions to it.

People that open carry know they will make people that have been conditioned by the media to fear guns,uncomfortable.

That is not their doing.

And to make a statement that people who open carry are 'yahoos' and that they are " hurting what 'WE' stand for" is the kind of statement that would make any Anti gunner proud.

That is EXACTLY how they think.

If it is legal,it is legal.

Being legal,carried respondsibly (i.e.,holstered, ready to go and not waving it around at no threat people like a mad person) means you DO NOT have to ask ANYONE FOR THE RIGHT TO OPEN CARRY WHERE IT IS LEGAL.

Just because you don't like it,does'nt mean you have the right to take the handgun from her side.

Whether you are a poster here or a sheriff there.

Remember this well.

Those that restrict gun rights for some,damn well will restrict gun rights for all,some day.

Worldwide that's already the case."

[Playboypenguin]

Open carry is not a "in your face" statement.

I hate to break it to you, but it most definitely is one.

You might not see it that way, and maybe it should not be one...but it still is one.

[JohnKSa]

Actually, according to the law, it does.

Here's the quote I posted.

Hain said Monday her home-based baby-sitting service has suffered, her children have been harassed, and she has been ostracized by her neighbors because of DeLeo's actions. In one instance, she said, a neighbor who saw Hain in a local store had the manager ask her to leave because she was carrying her handgun.

What she is complaining about in this quote has nothing to do with the the actions of the sheriff and everything to do with the fact that she's become well known for having a weapon. In one case it was because she was openly carrying in a store.

What doesn't follow is that she's complaining that people are ostracizing her/avoiding her business because she's known for carrying a pistol when it was her decision to carry openly.

You can't have it both ways. If you don't want people to know you have a gun (for whatever reason --your business, you want to shop in peace, you don't want people who hate guns to avoid you) then openly carrying it is probably not a good idea.

Again, I am NOT saying what she did was wrong nor am I saying that what the sheriff did was right, I'm just saying that it doesn't make a lot of sense for her to complain that she's suffering because now people know she has a gun when she made the conscious decision to openly carry a gun.

If the sheriff's temporary revocation of her permit damaged her financially then she's entitled to recover those damages. I don't see that she's complaining about not having her permit for a few days--wouldn't make sense for her to do that anyway since she could still have carried openly in the interim. What she's complaining are damages that have resulted from people finding out that she openly carries--and I don't see how that is the sheriff's fault.

[Conn. Trooper]

I have the "right" to wear a lime green Speedo to the pool and drive a primer gray 1982 Hyundai Elantra. But that does not make it a good idea. Carrying an openly displayed gun at a childs soccer game is a bad idea. Just because something is legal does not make it a good idea. I would have to think that even people that had no opinion on guns would not like sitting on the bleachers watching kids play soccer while somebody has a gun on display.

Seems like certain fans of open carry like to make a statement and that is the only reason they display guns on themselves in public. Enough "sheep" complain and the laws may change to prevent the open carry of guns.

I dont know the laws in Penn., so if the Sheriff revoked her permit without cause then he is wrong. If it was handled in the legal proper manner, then he is not wrong. I dont know either way. I know here in CT. if you have your permit revoked you have the right to appeal the revocation. The appeals board is made up of equal numbers of pro gun people as well as police. Its a public hearing and the public can attend. If you are ever bored and want a laugh go to a hearing and listen to what people have done with their legally owned guns. And the reasons and arguments they present to explain their actions. You will fall on the ground and laugh until you cry.

Just because someone owns a gun legally does not mean they have the greatest judgement in the world.

[Homerboy]

You know, it is legal for a woman to whip out her breast and breastfeed her child in a crowded restaurant. Doesn't mean she shouldn't go to the bathroom so other people who might be uncomfortable with it can enjoy their dinner in peace.

There are gun enthusiasts and their are gun nuts. I have met guys at the range who think they should be able to buy LAW rockets because the 2nd Amendment says so. Just because we are both gun owners, doesn't mean I have to agree with eveything they said. The woman deserves an apology, and nothing more. And where was this soccer game going on? I would imagine a school field. I believe carrying a gun at all is illegal on school grounds, is it not? Now I carry a gun when I go to watch my kid play baseball, but it is tucked away and nobody knows it is there. Simple, isn't it?

[thrgunsmith]

and wish her the best of luck, I wish I was lucky enough to find a gal like that.

[Playboypenguin]

You know, it is legal for a woman to whip out her breast and breastfeed her child in a crowded restaurant. Doesn't mean she shouldn't go to the bathroom so other people who might be uncomfortable with it can enjoy their dinner in peace.

I kind of take exception with this example. If you are the one so uptight and uncomfortable with the human body that something as natural and simple as breast feeding offends you then it is your issue. You need to work through your own puritan hangups...and this is coming from a man with very little use for breasts what-so-ever.

I feel kind of the same way about open carry. I am not a fan of it, but where it is legal feeling uncomfortable is my cross to bear.

Unfortunately, when push comes to shove, I feel that all these types of displays end up doing is encouraging stricter gun laws.

[XavierBreath]

There is an interview with Meleanie Hain here.

LEBANON--Some people have called Meleanie Hain a courageous defender of the Second Amendment.
Others have referred to her in online forums as an "idiot" for taking her gun to her 5-year-old daughter's soccer game in Lebanon in September.


Hain said she is "just a mom who happens to carry a gun ... everywhere."

No matter your viewpoint, there is no doubt Hain aroused a storm of controversy -- making headlines locally and nationally. Whenever The Patriot-News published a story about Hain on PennLive.com, dozens, sometimes hundreds, of readers weighed in.

Hain agreed to an interview by e-mail. Following is an edited synopsis:

Q: How do you feel about all the publicity?

A: The antis [those who are anti-gun] are happy being antis just as I am happy being a gun owner. None of them posting questions and ridicule on the Internet forums have any intention of changing their views just as I have no intention of changing mine. ... I have read all sorts of slander, personal attacks, and even threats toward me, my family, and, yes, some specific to my children.
The publicity surrounding me as a person makes me feel awkward and uncomfortable. As stated previously, I am willing to talk to the press because the issue is so important, but the focus on me, personally, has been difficult because it simply is not about me.

Q: Why did you carry a gun to the soccer game?

A: Like it or not, I do not have to validate myself to the public for my actions, ... I have come to the conclusion that this is an impossible task. It may sound arrogant, but ... the Constitution has guaranteed me a right, and there is nothing more to say about it.
People who say, 'You do not need a gun at a soccer field,' ... I wonder if they could tell me when I will need it? That way I could just avoid that time and place.

Q: Did you ever consider not carrying at the soccer game just to make other parents feel better, even though it is your right?

A: I think this question would be better directed at the parents who were bothered by my choice to openly carry to the game in the form of, 'Did you ever consider that had you taken a different approach with Mrs. Hain that you may have yielded a different outcome, perhaps the one you desired from the start of all of this?'

Q: How is your family handling this?

A: My husband has been supportive all along. He has just kept himself out of the public eye because of the sensitive nature of his employment. My children are also in the know in what has been going on, and they are very supportive as well. My mom is very supportive.

As for the rest of my family, I have never asked them if they are supportive, and they have never made it a point to tell me one way or the other. In previous conversations with them, I have come to the conclusion that they are not well educated about firearms and are basically anti-gun.

Q: Why did you decide to sue the sheriff?

A: Just the fact that he was wrong is evidenced by the fact that my license was restored to me. ... To think that people would know this and then question the lawsuit I am pursuing baffles me.

I am a victim of Sheriff [Michael] DeLeo's. I am a victim of those in society as a direct result of his actions as well. The way people look at me sometimes when I am out running errands, I feel as if I am wearing a scarlet letter. and really, it's a Glock 26.

Q: You say in the lawsuit that the sheriff's actions have caused you to lose clients in your day care business: How so?

A: People following the story actually believe that people left my business because I was carrying or because they were deceived, and this is just not the case. Not even close. ... The first client who pulled their child was one of the sheriff's deputies that I had been working for. We had a wonderful working relationship. He and his wife knew that I carried.

On Sept. 26, the deputy and his wife gave me their two-week notice ... I was told it had absolutely nothing to do with me but that he was being asked a lot of questions about me at work.
... Basically, because I lost the first client, the next person to go pulled their child out because their child now had no one to play with.

Q: Did you grow up with guns?

A: I did not grow up in a home with guns. ... I have been carrying for just about a year, although I did start learning about firearms, safe handling, and how to shoot more [than] 2 1/2 years ago. It was a long process as I wanted to do things in such a way that I felt I was ready to responsibly own and carry a firearm.

No, I am not a hunter. ... That question cracks me up! I am a vegetarian.

Q: How do you feel about the Brady Center becoming involved?

A: They offered some aid to the county, but to my knowledge, neither the county nor the sheriff have taken them up on that, so it would seem to me they are just sitting on the sidelines drooling in hopes that they do get the go-ahead to handle things.

Q: Are you getting support, financial or otherwise, from the National Rifle Association or other gun-rights organizations?

A: I am getting a lot of support from various groups and individuals across the country. Some even from other countries. It has been incredible, and words cannot express what it has meant to me during this difficult time.

Attorneys for a Lebanon County sheriff are seeking to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Meleaine Hain, who sued county officials after her gun permit was revoked.

Lawyers for Sheriff Michael DeLeo filed a motion in U.S. Middle District Court Friday seeking to have the suit dismissed. Attorneys with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence have said they would assist in his defense.

The sheriff revoked Hain's gun permit after she carried her gun to her 5-year-old daughter's soccer game. A Lebanon County judge reversed the order, giving Hain her permit back. But she sued DeLeo and county officials for $1 million, seeking payment for her attorney's fees, lost wages and emotional distress.

[Playboypenguin]

After reading the interview I have to admit to now having a pretty negative opinion of the woman.

[Socrates]

Try this, and see if it changes your mind:

http://www.treesandthings.com/story/.../24/172522/982

Retired judge acting like God, and the Sheriff trying to make a political/public news story out of the entire thing:

Soccer Mom's Heat Draws Heat
pO157.
Posted to Politics on Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 08:47:37 PM EST (promoted by DEMachina). RSS.

Mr. Lebowski, this is Bell Salnicker with the Lebanon, PA Soccer League and I just got a, an informal report, that a parent from your team, uh, Melanie Hain, carried a legally registered and permitted firearm during league play. If this is true of course, it contravenes a number of the league's by-laws, and article 27 of the league.

On September 11th, a soccer mom drew the ire of soccer league officials and the referee. Her offense? Carrying a legally owned Glock 26 in a holster while on the sidelines. The soccer mom, Melanie Hain, was surprised because carrying a pistol openly in Pennsylvania is not a crime (outside of Philadelphia) and furthermore, Ms. Hain had a permit to carry her weapon concealed if she so chose. Charlie Jones, a youth soccer coach and county public defender, stated that he approached Ms. Hain because several parents were "upset" about seeing her pistol and asked her to move away to a more remote part of the sidelines.

In a later interview, Mr. Jones stated he did not believe Ms. Hain was breaking any laws by carrying openly and simply asked her to move away to calm the other parents. There was no call to the police and no confrontation. Ms. Hain states she always carries her pistol openly and has never had a problem before.

Unfortunately, the problem did not end there. A few days later Ms. Hain received a piece of correspondence from the soccer association stating she would not be welcome at any other events were she armed. Nigel Foundling, the soccer association representative and a former judge, also notified her that the police had been called on her because she wore a gun to the game. Ms. Hain took particular exception to one statement in his letter. He stated, "A responsible adult would realize that such behavior has no place at a soccer game."

She ignored the e-mail.

"After I received the e-mail, I continued to carry. Because they play on public property, they are not allowed to prevent me from carrying even though they are a private organization. [...] Nigel seems to think he could throw his weight around and pick on me even though he is not a judge anymore."

This situation lead to a nastygram (pdf) from the Lebanon County Sheriff. Sheriff Deleo mentioned that several people who saw her weapon during the game were "upset" and further went along to revoke her pistol permit as he found her to be "an individual whose character and reputation is such that the individual would be likely to act in a dangerous manner to public safety."

When contacted by the newspaper, the Sheriff stated that he took away her permit because he wanted to bring public attention to the matter and was not allowed to impound her firearm.

"I felt some action was needed, and I do believe that something like this should be brought to the public's attention so the public is aware of what took place. The public has the right to complain about the issue, and if the Legislature wants to do something, then so be it."

Ms. Hain is appealing the revocation in court. Until then she continues to carry her weapon openly.

The Sheriff broke the law, revoked a legal permit, to make a political statement. This violates the his oath of office. He should be removed, and, I hope that is part of her lawsuit. As a government employee, he should be held to a high standard, required to faithfully execute his job as Sheriff.
If he wants to make political statements, he should give up his job as Sheriff, and run for mayor.
To paraphrase Scalia: The Sheriff has a number of methods of addressing the problem, but, the one he chooses is not on the table.

Also, in revoking the permit, the Sheriff's language, and justification is either Slander or libel, depending on how it was presented. Most likely, he had to write it in the paper work to revoke the permit, so libel. Then, Slander when spoken to the press. That IS actionable, since his clear effort was to damage the woman's reputation, and, it appears to have effected her ability to make a living.

I suspect that she will be come ostracized, thanks to the public humiliation the Sheriff had in mind, to prevoke his states law makers.
She may well have to move, and, I suspect later, her husband will loose his job. There is a big difference between making a few people at a soccer game nervous, and, taking that issue, and making it a national one, by revoking her gun permit, illegally.

It is becoming REALLY clear that this woman is being used as a poltical football, by a corrupt Sheriff that fails to follow the law, the worst kind, to further his own political career. Ms. Hain deserves nothing but the TOTAL support of gun owners for her actions. But for the Grace of God, it could be anyone of us here.

The next step is a Sheriff that won't permit you to carry CCW at where ever he feels you shouldn't be. Oh, I forgot. That's already happened in my county, which doesn't issue any permits to speak of at all...

[Musketeer]

It is becoming REALLY clear that this woman is being used as a poltical football, by a corrupt Sheriff that fails to follow the law, the worst kind, to further his own political career. Ms. Hain deserves nothing but the TOTAL support of gun owners for her actions. But for the Grace of God, it could be anyone of us here.

Yep, any one of us here stupid enough to OC at a child's sporting event.

The sheriff may suck but this Ms. Hain is still a moron. This type of action is how laws banning carry and added restrictions get passed.

[Socrates]

Yep, any one of us here stupid enough to OC at a child's sporting event.

NO. This is how are freedoms are won back. Heller is an excellent example.

[zxcvbob]

Yep, any one of us here stupid enough to OC at a child's sporting event.
The sheriff may suck but this Ms. Hain is still a moron. This type of action is how laws banning carry and added restrictions get passed.

I don't think being a [alleged] moron strips one of her rights without due process.

OC makes a lot of sense for a woman who might be carrying a toddler when she needs her gun. (I realize that she will likely *never* need her gun, but how exactly does one choose the place and time to defend oneself? And from another angle, how many cops ever actually *need* their guns?)

[Bud Helms]

Socrates, thanks for posting that article.

XavierBreath, thank you for posting that interview. One part stood out as I read through:

Q: Why did you decide to sue the sheriff?

A: Just the fact that he was wrong is evidenced by the fact that my license was restored to me. ... To think that people would know this and then question the lawsuit I am pursuing baffles me. ...

That is an astute answer.

After reading both the article and the interview, I must say I am a fan of Mrs Hain's.