Sheriff illegally takes away a Glock 26 from a Soccer Mom! - Page 8

Playboypenguin · January 1, 2009, 05:05 PM

Quote:

I'm curious if anybody who is against open carry has read through this and reconsidered their position?

I for one did change my opinion during the course of the thread. I am not pro-open carry for myself but, as you can see from my posts, I did initially take a supportive stance regarding the woman involved in this case. Then I learned more about the circumstances of the event and I withdrew my support.

It was not just because she was carrying at a child's soccer game, it was not because she had repeatedly been asked to not carry at the soccer games, it was not because I felt she disrespecting the wishes of the others parents, and it was not even because she chose to carry a gun as ugly as a Glock openly.

It was because of why and how she did it.

Instead of taking a responsible approach and choosing to be a positive example of why she does and should have the privilege (and open carry is a privilege granted by law that not all states enjoy) to carry openly she just presented herself as a bull headed jerk who did not care what anyone else thinks.

If she would have said..."I have the right to carry. I am competent to carry. I am going to show that the negative ideas that other hold about firearms are not applicable to me" I would have continued to support here.

If she had reached out to the other parents in an attempt to educate them about firearms ownership I would have continued to support here.

If she would have addressed the concerns of others that she was not competent to carry I would have continued to support her.

If she would have presented herself in a manner that showed forethought and conviction I would have continued to support here.

Instead she chose to deflect questions, hide behind the law, and pretty much come across as an inconsiderate person that is just doing something to be contrary because "she can."

dm1333 · January 1, 2009, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Again, there's a big difference between asserting your rights and asserting your rights in such a way as to turn the majority opinion against your cause. In my opinion a children's sporting event wasn't the ideal location to make a stand for open carry. To put it mildly.

I couldn't watch any of the interviews that were linked in this thread so I may have missed it, but it seems like she has been carrying openly everywhere. Why should she not carry at her kids soccer game? Excluding the argument that she had been asked not to, of course, is there any valid reason for her to not open carry at these games? Nobody seems to be against concealed carry at the game but is there really much of a difference?

Playboypenguin · January 1, 2009, 05:08 PM

Quote:

1) I carry wherever I go, even to Disney.
2) They can ask, but why does she have to bow to their whims?
3) What is she supposed to do? Leave her child there when attacked? Wait to die? We don't choose the circumstances of a defensive shooting, unless we are the aggressor.

1. So you admit to having a blatant disregard for both the law and the rights of private property owners.
2. They can not only ask, they can eject her from the event according to most laws regarding civil behavior. If she is creating a disturbance she can be removed.
3. How would the gun being under her shirt prevent her from defending her family?

**JohnKSa** · January 1, 2009, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dm1333

Why should she not carry at her kids soccer game? Excluding the argument that she had been asked not to, of course...

What you want to exclude is, unfortunately, exactly the point. By continuing to carry OPENLY at the game after being asked not to she chose that location to make her stand.

Quote:

Nobody seems to be against concealed carry at the game but is there really much of a difference?

I would ask the same question--apparently there was to Ms. Hain.

Quote:

We shouldn't carry if we are asked not to, even if we have the legal right to do so...

It seems that there's a lot of effort being made to set up a false dichotomy.

Ms. Hain's choices weren't ONLY between not carrying or carrying openly. She also had the legal option of carrying concealed.

Therefore it is incorrect to say/imply/argue that anyone suggesting open carry to the game wasn't the best option are also saying that she should not carry at all.

Playboypenguin · January 1, 2009, 05:14 PM

Quote:

By continuing to carry OPENLY at the game after being asked not to she chose that location to make her stand.

It was not so much the location of where she chose to make her stand to me, but in how poorly she presented that stand.

There seems to be different levels of support and opposition here.

1. People that would support anyone open carrying anywhere regardless of circumstances.

2. People that support this woman under these (or similar) circumstance.

3. People that could support her in this, and case under these circumstances, had her behavior/motivation been different.

4. People that can support open carry but not under circumstance like these (IE: a child's soccer game, a public gathering where she was asked to not participate, etc.)

5. People that do not support open carry under any circumstances.

I would fall under the number 3 definition.

HappyGunner · January 1, 2009, 05:20 PM

She should not have to make any stand, her State has open carry where she was was not a restricted location. So it's legal to open carry. The Sheriff needs to find something better to do then pander to the local anti-gun group.

dm1333 · January 1, 2009, 05:22 PM

Quote:

What you want to exclude is, unfortunately, exactly the point. By continuing to carry OPENLY at the game after being asked not to she chose that location to make her stand.

I think we view her decision to continue to carry at the game differently. She was asked to stop doing something that was within her rights, she chose to continue. I don't view that as making a stand. Keep in mind that I have not been able to load and view any of the interviews.

**JohnKSa** · January 1, 2009, 05:31 PM

Quote:

I don't view that as making a stand.

That's the point that many here seem to be missing. It doesn't really matter what the gun community thinks. Unfortunately the important factor is public opinion.

HappyGunner · January 1, 2009, 05:38 PM

If the law covering the carrying of handguns in her State says open carry is legal, what does public opinion have to do with anything?

Playboypenguin · January 1, 2009, 05:39 PM

Quote:

If the law covering the carrying of handguns in her State says open carry is legal, what does public opinion have to do with anything?

Do you really have to ask that question? Seriously?

**JohnKSa** · January 1, 2009, 05:48 PM

Quote:

If the law covering the carrying of handguns in her State says open carry is legal, what does public opinion have to do with anything?

Laws are frequently changed and public opinion is one of the reasons that happens.

dm1333 · January 1, 2009, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Do you really have to ask that question? Seriously?

If public opinion was against you exercising your freedom of speech would you start censoring what you said? Happy Gunner makes a good point, sometimes public opinion sucks.

Playboypenguin · January 1, 2009, 05:53 PM

Quote:

If public opinion was against you exercising your freedom of speech would you start censoring what you said? Happy Gunner makes a good point, sometimes public opinion sucks.

Apples to oranges. Open carry is not constitutionally protected and can be banned by simple majority vote through legal referendum. Therefore, public opinion is very important.

**JohnKSa** · January 1, 2009, 05:58 PM

Quote:

...sometimes public opinion sucks.

Sometimes it does. Unfortunately that doesn't change the outcome.

webhead · January 1, 2009, 06:12 PM

So is this thread about if we support the woman/sheriff or if we think they were within the law?

From what I've read, she did not break any law including public disturbance or any kind of threat. What the sheriff did was against the law - he basically made a law that applied to just her - SHE can't carry open at a kids soccer game. And I think the sheriff should be held accountable for his actions otherwise what will prevent it from happening again (thoughts of New Orleans case and that slap on the wrist comes to mind). A jury will decide if her amount for damages is excessive. But the sheriff should not be creating rules based on the complaints of the people but enforcing the rules based on someone breaking the law as reported by others. Nothing wrong with checking her out as far as legally allowed to own, no warrants, etc. as long as it doesn't become harassment.

As for the "making a statement" and her wisdom of open carry, that's been debated both sides for a few pages now. But I will say that judging her actions based on her intelligence or common sense, how well she articulates her reasons for carrying, wanting to make a point, etc. should not affect her rights/privileges. Being able to add 2 and 2 or quoting laws or even having a list of good, valid reason for carrying is not a requirement for any law I've ever seen in this country. "I carry because I want to" should be sufficient. And having to prove she's sane and stable seems to be assumption of guilt before innocence. Again, not debating if she was smart or "could have handled it better". But I am saying that I fully believe the law is for everyone without prior prejudice and this paranoia/guilty on sight part is wrong.

Sad part is, they'll just pass a new law that adds children events to the list of places you can't carry, concealed or open. That is the consequence when a simple majority wants to limit the rights/privileges of a few.

SigfanTN · January 1, 2009, 06:14 PM

What are we really debating here? Is it whether she made poor decisions with her mode of carry and where, or is it whether the sheriff made poor decisions?

Most of the debate seems to be about Hain, but does that mean everyone calling out Hain agrees with Sheriff Deleo?

I ask because I feel the issue is with him. I don't agree or disagree with Hain in her approach, but she was not prohibited legally from carrying how she did. It obviously rubbed some folks the wrong way, and they tried to deal with it how they saw fit. DeLeo, on the other hand, tried to make a statement to her using his authority to revoke her license, without conducting a proper investigation. I was not able to discern from his testimony any clear issue which identified Hain as a person who should not carry a firearm. If she had it out waving it around, or if she was telling everyone they shouldn't mess with her because she was totin' a gun, then yes, I would say the sheriff had more to go on. He did not reveal that he so much as interviewed a single parent, rather he went down to the park and had a look around. That is no investigation.

[Edit] I see that I was beat to the punch by webhead

Danzig · January 1, 2009, 06:26 PM

JohnKSa, so what you are saying is that we should give up our rights if the general opinion is that we shouldn't exercise them?

I don't think so. I think that we should exercise them MORE. Especially such things as open carry. If we want the public to become more accepting of open carry..then they need to see it happening more. Which means that we need to exercise our right to open carry more.

They will never become more accepting of the right if it doesn't become the "norm".

Playboypenguin · January 1, 2009, 06:27 PM

Quote:

but does that mean everyone calling out Hain agrees with Sheriff Deleo?

I do believe that people who are claiming he did anything "illegal" are completely wrong and that the misleading title of this thread should be altered to reflect reality. Any sheriff can remove a person's carry weapon if they have reason to question the person carrying's mental competence or behavior. They also have the authority to revoke a permit pending due process.

Still, I do not support how the sheriff handled this situation. He should have simply asked the woman to leave the public assembly peacefully or risk charges for disturbing the peace.

Dearhunter61 · January 1, 2009, 06:41 PM

I watched the video and read the first page of the responses. I agree with all of them!

Boy now I am sounding like a politician. :barf:

After watching the video I agree she was not blessed with a lot up stairs. For those who think she was deliberately making a statement....I am not sure she is smart enough to think that way. It is her right to carry openly and that I believe is as far as it got for her. I do not think she ever considered the consequences of her actions either good or bad.

If the law says she has the right to carry like she was great. But I would say that if we are going to continue to have these rights then those that have them need to exercise them with some common sense.

I do think that if you carry even if you have the right to carry openly you need to consider peoples reaction to it and I DO NOT think it wise to p*$$ off those people. It is simply throwing gas on a fire. And for what? Just so you can show people you CAN CAN CAN...I do not think this is a way to win friends and influence people.

There is always a time when you need to stand up for your rights! But there is also a time to use good sound judgment.

SigfanTN · January 1, 2009, 06:44 PM

Quote:

He should have simply asked the woman to leave the public assembly peacefully or risk charges for disturbing the peace.

Yes! In my opinion that would have been the best course of action for him to take.

[Edited to add:]

You make some good points in your other post about why you don't support her in this instance. I can see a little more easily why some are so against her, although, I don't necessarily agree with all of them.

Some of the arguments others posted read too much like the things I hear from my anti-gun coworker friend.

Dearhunter61 · January 1, 2009, 06:47 PM

I think everyone is talking about Hain because I believe most if not all agree that the sheriff over stepped his bounds here. We are just looking at the whole situation and providing a perspective on it....

Shorts · January 1, 2009, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Still, I do not support how the sheriff handled this situation. He should have simply asked the woman to leave the public assembly peacefully or risk charges for disturbing the peace.

The sheriff was not present.

Quote:

Any sheriff can remove a person's carry weapon if they have reason to question the person carrying's mental competence or behavior. They also have the authority to revoke a permit pending due process.

And the reason he did revoke was highlighted in red in my post above. If you read the 'revocation' section, this was done by the book and Hain complied by the book. She also appealed, again by the book.

The problem that Hain has with the Sheriff is that they believe the Sheriff did not conduct a proper investigation prior to pulling her permit. This information is all available in the transcript.

Quote:

It was not so much the location of where she chose to make her stand to me, but in how poorly she presented that stand.

So then why not help clean up the argument to help? Wouldn't that work out better than going along criticizing her judgment, interviewing skills or intellect with the rest of the folks? This is what I was referring to in my post above regarding Heller.

Another angle I'd like to take is, are we certain that Hain's interview and presentation are not off par with the norm of the population? I ask this because I've seen and experienced with my own eyes the differences in a population and its behaviors, actions, and speech in a variety of geographical locations.

Quote:

I'm curious if anybody who is against open carry has read through this and reconsidered their position?

No, because the arguments against OC are the same here as they are on another forum, and the next, and my husband and other folks I know. The opposition is not uncommon.

**JohnKSa** · January 1, 2009, 06:52 PM

Quote:

JohnKSa, so what you are saying is that we should give up our rights if the general opinion is that we shouldn't exercise them?

Not at all. In fact, had you read my posts carefully, you would realize that my concern is that this particular incident will result in the loss of rights. What I'm saying is that if GP is against your exercise of a right then it would be prudent to exercise that right in a manner that doesn't result in the GP pushing the legislature to make the exercise of that right illegal.

Quote:

If we want the public to become more accepting of open carry..then they need to see it happening more. Which means that we need to exercise our right to open carry more.

They will never become more accepting of the right if it doesn't become the "norm".

They will also never become more accepting in PA if the PA legislature passes a law prohibiting open carry as a result of this (or another similar incident).

It's surprising to me that there are apparently members of the gun community that don't understand how a single highly publicized incident can result in the passage of laws that restrict gun rights. We've seen it happen over and over again...

If acclimatizing the GP to open carry is the goal, then open carrying in situations that are highly controversial is NOT a good strategy. That's a recipe for inflaming the GP, not acclimatizing them. Which could very well have exactly the opposite of the desired effect.

A good number of people in the gun community are looking at this situation and saying:

"We need to punish the heck out of the sheriff so that in the future LEOs are afraid to abuse citizens in this manner again."

The problem is that they're ignoring that the GP is thinking:

"We need to fix the law so that nuts like this women can't carry pistols around our precious children."

Quote:

Most of the debate seems to be about Hain, but does that mean everyone calling out Hain agrees with Sheriff Deleo?

I certainly do not agree with the Sheriff. He was clearly in the wrong.

Dearhunter61 · January 1, 2009, 07:03 PM

You are dead on and I could not say it any better!

Shorts · January 1, 2009, 07:10 PM

Quote:

A good number of people in the gun community are looking at this situation and saying:

"We need to punish the heck out of the sheriff so that in the future LEOs are afraid to abuse citizens in this manner again."

The problem is that they're ignoring that the GP is thinking:

"We need to fix the law so that nuts like this women can't carry pistols around our precious children."

I agree with this (about the view points of each position). I don't believe OCers are ignoring that the GP is thinking that. In fact, that is stated very clearly, especially in regards to public areas in a variety of news articles and interviews. However, PA has state preemption laws. OCers know the city cannot prohibit firearms, concealed or openly carried.

I will ask again to the people here, if OC is not appropriate at a soccer game, what locations are appropriate for OC?

January 1, 2009, 05:20 PM	#181
HappyGunner Senior Member Join Date: September 18, 2004 Posts: 1,302	Open carry is legal where she was. She should not have to make any stand, her State has open carry where she was was not a restricted location. So it's legal to open carry. The Sheriff needs to find something better to do then pander to the local anti-gun group.

January 1, 2009, 06:26 PM	#192
Danzig Senior Member Join Date: June 30, 2005 Location: Fort Carson, Colorado Posts: 896	JohnKSa, so what you are saying is that we should give up our rights if the general opinion is that we shouldn't exercise them? I don't think so. I think that we should exercise them MORE. Especially such things as open carry. If we want the public to become more accepting of open carry..then they need to see it happening more. Which means that we need to exercise our right to open carry more. They will never become more accepting of the right if it doesn't become the "norm". __________________ Fide et Fortitudine - My family motto "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences of attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it" - Thomas Jefferson

January 1, 2009, 07:03 PM	#199
Dearhunter61 Senior Member Join Date: May 5, 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 518	JohnKSa You are dead on and I could not say it any better!

January 1, 2009, 05:38 PM	#184
HappyGunner Senior Member Join Date: September 18, 2004 Posts: 1,302	If the law covering the carrying of handguns in her State says open carry is legal, what does public opinion have to do with anything?

January 1, 2009, 06:12 PM	#190
webhead Member Join Date: November 17, 2008 Location: Florida Posts: 30	So is this thread about if we support the woman/sheriff or if we think they were within the law? From what I've read, she did not break any law including public disturbance or any kind of threat. What the sheriff did was against the law - he basically made a law that applied to just her - SHE can't carry open at a kids soccer game. And I think the sheriff should be held accountable for his actions otherwise what will prevent it from happening again (thoughts of New Orleans case and that slap on the wrist comes to mind). A jury will decide if her amount for damages is excessive. But the sheriff should not be creating rules based on the complaints of the people but enforcing the rules based on someone breaking the law as reported by others. Nothing wrong with checking her out as far as legally allowed to own, no warrants, etc. as long as it doesn't become harassment. As for the "making a statement" and her wisdom of open carry, that's been debated both sides for a few pages now. But I will say that judging her actions based on her intelligence or common sense, how well she articulates her reasons for carrying, wanting to make a point, etc. should not affect her rights/privileges. Being able to add 2 and 2 or quoting laws or even having a list of good, valid reason for carrying is not a requirement for any law I've ever seen in this country. "I carry because I want to" should be sufficient. And having to prove she's sane and stable seems to be assumption of guilt before innocence. Again, not debating if she was smart or "could have handled it better". But I am saying that I fully believe the law is for everyone without prior prejudice and this paranoia/guilty on sight part is wrong. Sad part is, they'll just pass a new law that adds children events to the list of places you can't carry, concealed or open. That is the consequence when a simple majority wants to limit the rights/privileges of a few.

January 1, 2009, 06:14 PM	#191
SigfanTN Senior Member Join Date: May 27, 2008 Posts: 183	What are we really debating here? Is it whether she made poor decisions with her mode of carry and where, or is it whether the sheriff made poor decisions? Most of the debate seems to be about Hain, but does that mean everyone calling out Hain agrees with Sheriff Deleo? I ask because I feel the issue is with him. I don't agree or disagree with Hain in her approach, but she was not prohibited legally from carrying how she did. It obviously rubbed some folks the wrong way, and they tried to deal with it how they saw fit. DeLeo, on the other hand, tried to make a statement to her using his authority to revoke her license, without conducting a proper investigation. I was not able to discern from his testimony any clear issue which identified Hain as a person who should not carry a firearm. If she had it out waving it around, or if she was telling everyone they shouldn't mess with her because she was totin' a gun, then yes, I would say the sheriff had more to go on. He did not reveal that he so much as interviewed a single parent, rather he went down to the park and had a look around. That is no investigation. [Edit] I see that I was beat to the punch by webhead

January 1, 2009, 06:41 PM	#194
Dearhunter61 Senior Member Join Date: May 5, 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 518	I watched the video and read the first page of the responses. I agree with all of them! Boy now I am sounding like a politician. :barf: After watching the video I agree she was not blessed with a lot up stairs. For those who think she was deliberately making a statement....I am not sure she is smart enough to think that way. It is her right to carry openly and that I believe is as far as it got for her. I do not think she ever considered the consequences of her actions either good or bad. If the law says she has the right to carry like she was great. But I would say that if we are going to continue to have these rights then those that have them need to exercise them with some common sense. I do think that if you carry even if you have the right to carry openly you need to consider peoples reaction to it and I DO NOT think it wise to p*$$ off those people. It is simply throwing gas on a fire. And for what? Just so you can show people you CAN CAN CAN...I do not think this is a way to win friends and influence people. There is always a time when you need to stand up for your rights! But there is also a time to use good sound judgment.

January 1, 2009, 06:47 PM	#196
Dearhunter61 Senior Member Join Date: May 5, 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 518	I think everyone is talking about Hain because I believe most if not all agree that the sheriff over stepped his bounds here. We are just looking at the whole situation and providing a perspective on it....