Our view: History loops itself in 2nd concealed carry dust-up

I guess you think the powers that be schedule court dates for political reasons?

It seems to be a coincidence to me.

But to those of your ilk, maybe everything is a conspiracy?

Come on P.O. Rights are rights. Carrying a holstered weapon to a soccer game is no cause for panic.
A secured gun, in fact, is not nearly as threatening as the moronic unbalanced parents screaming at game officials and fellow parents because something didn't go right for little Jimmy.
Heck, I think it might be bad judgement to venture into that atmosphere without a weapon.

"pro-gun activists politicized the incident and engineered a headline-grabbing media spectacle. "

"we wondered how long it would take for a copycat to exercise the right to open carry in defiance of common sense and courtesy"

"Justifiably angry parents complained"

"Of course, we make all these points on the assumption that these open carriers simply suffered honest lapses in judgment, and were not actively trying to cause a ruckus to serve a greater political cause"

"We have no evidence of collusion to that end, but we do find it interesting that a copycat incident dealing with a galvanizing wedge issue pops up right before another Election Day."

Talk about agenda's and conspiracy theories. The opinions of journalists can be a real eye opener.

Respecting others' rights while exercising your own? While that's always sound advice, I'm just not seeing what rights of others these people weren't respecting. The right to not be offended? I'm pretty sure a right doesn't exist.

"Instead of playing off people's fears to make a point, gun advocates would do better for their cause by showing more respect for those that don't feel a need to carry a firearm everywhere they go."
You are kidding, aren't you?
Instead of playing off of people's fears to make a point, opinion-writers would do better for their cause by showing more respect for those that don't fel that emotions have any place in determining if one may lawfully exercise a right. How does that work for you?
In both cases you cite, a court hearing was held and it was determined that the taking of the concealed handgun permit was not permitted by law. Yet you play off people's fears by saying that someone openly carried a firearm "in defiance of common sense and courtesy" to a place "where people would be guaranteed to take exception."
Since when is exercising a right in a completely lawful manner "defiance of common sense and courtesy"? And how do you know that "people would be guaranteed to take exception"? Yes, some very limited number did take exception, but I do not recall any reporting that the police were flooded with 911 calls from every person with a cell phone who saw or heard about Mrs. Hain at the soccer game.
But I guess it it OK for an opinion writer to play off people's fears in order to make the point that they do not like it when others exercise lawful right in a law-abiding manner just because the opinion writer does not "like" the right being exercised. I guess that does better for your cause than anything else.

Um...People open carry in PA(and elsewhere) everyday and have for sometime. This isn't a 'copycat'. But I guess, since you are the center of the universe, if you haven't heard of people open carrying hundreds of times then it doesn't happen. Conspiracy wacko's.

Matt, you are so dead wrong!
You are advocating that just the sight of a weapon should invoke fear. Please. Just how out of touch are you?
Once again (and again and again), your ignorance of this topic is showing. You should really read the Bill of Rights, emphasis on RIGHTS. Then, I urge you to draft a retraction to this article.
Matt, you really need to educate yourself on the topic you are writing before you (sorry for the pun), pull the trigger and print it.

matthrew, you should read where and how you can carry a sidearm with a license.
you have you idiot head stuck up some place that I will not mention.

i think most people in the area are getting sick of The Public opinion trying to run our lifes with your uptight ideas.
the best thi8ng that could happen to the area is for you to shut down.
you are the type of person who put IDIOTS in power who have no idea of anything, but what they want and be da** with everybody else.
do the so called parents say anything when a cop or the idiots that think they are cops with badges carry their guns.
I would feel much safer with someone who knows how to handle a gun than most of the one who have badges and do not and then try to force their will on the public.
why don't you move to a state like Maryland who denies any ones rights

"Nonetheless, the cases are similar enough that we feel compelled to re-emphasize the importance of respecting others' rights in the exercise of your own."

Gotcha. So you are in favor of censoring works of art such as Andres Serrano's "Piss Christ" which "in defiance of common sense and courtesy, by inappropriately" displaying it in a heavily publicized, large public venue, offended many millions of people. Or of censuring those who burn an American flag " in defiance of common sense and courtesy, by inappropriately" doing so at places such as the steps of the Supreme Court of the United States angering and offending millions of people. Or of telling NYT reporters to shut up and quite printing when they " in defiance of common sense and courtesy, by inappropriately" outing top secret government terrorist interdiction programs thereby aiding and abetting our (potential) enemies potentially making 300 millions people less safe and scaring many who fear that terrorist networks are now more able to work around our intelligence networks.

I assume the above because certainly you would apply the same standards of common sense, courtesy, appropriateness and propriety to matters of the First Amendment as you do to the Second Amendment, correct? A right is a right regardless of whether it gores your bull or just smears bull squeeze on your pages, correct?

Your exercise of your first amendment rights offends me, in fact, I was offended by something I read yesterday too. Apparently there is a conspiracy...and right before Election Day. I think you should have to keep your opinions concealed. Perhaps a lawsuit would set you straight, make you think twice about exercising your rights when it offends others, sound appropriate to you?

Once again, whoever complains first is the victim.

It is really a shame that I have to consider everyone else and who, what, when, or how they may possibly be offended when I walk out of my house each morning.

Stop trying to push an agenda PO.

Carrying a firearm in public is only an issue when a liberal whiner makes it an issue. If it offends you, too bad, but you have no right to go through life unoffended.

The only collusion to make an issue out of the lawful and constitutionally-protected carrying of firearms is carried out by those who would seek to marginalize and criminalize such behavior.

Matt's opinion is terribly disturbing and yet at the same time, not a surprise at all.

This has to be one of the most poorly researched and incredibly off the mark editorials (opinion) I have ever read!

I carry openly nearly every day and have for YEARS.

In the last year+, in particular, people in Pa. and other states are realizing the benefits of open carry and choosing to carry that way.

Nothing more, nothing less.

There's nothing quite so free as freedom.

ummm...

there has been a growing open carry movement in PA for at least a couple years. a growing number of people in PA open carry pretty much everywhere they go.(you can argue that that is a good or bad thing, but you can't legitimately argue that it has not been going on...and that this whole situation is something new. it just plain isn't.)

in many ways, the open carry movement here in PA is following in the footsteps of the open carry movement in virginia which has been going on for even longer.

ya might wanna do a little bit of actual research prior to writing your opinion pieces in the future. people are more likely to take your opinion into consideration if it does not completely fly in the face of observable reality. of course, that might get in the way of your agenda, so maybe you do not want to do that...

The author seems to have missed a few critical details, such as the fact that Mrs. Hain carries openly everywhere she goes, not just to soccer games, and had carried openly at every game and practice of both her daughter and her son with no previous incidents. Guess the facts just didn't fit in with the authors agenda.

It was almost a year ago that a local man temporarily lost his permit to speak in public after he openly and legally committed free speech at a polling place to vote.

A couple of months later, a local judge affirmed that no crime had occurred and returned the man's permit. But not before pro-ree speech activists politicized the incident and engineered a headline-grabbing media spectacle.

At the time, we wondered how long it would take for a copycat to exercise the right to free speech in defiance of common sense and courtesy, by inappropriately bringing a mouth to a place where people would be guaranteed to take exception.

We got our answer a few weeks ago: About 10 months.

On Sept. 11, Meleanie Hain openly wore her mouth to her 5-year-old daughter's soccer game in Lebanon. Justifiably angry parents complained, and Hain -- like Chambersburg's Greg Rotz -- lost her permit for a brief time before a judge returned it to her this week.

The two cases practically mirror each other, with one important exception: Since Rotz's incident occurred at a polling place, it wasn't likely to be witnessed by a lot of children and their protective parents.

Nonetheless, the cases are similar enough that we feel compelled to re-emphasize the importance of respecting others' rights in the exercise of your own. The concept amounts to one of the pillars of civilized society.

Of course, we make all these points on the assumption that these free speechers simply suffered honest lapses in judgment, and were not actively trying to cause a ruckus to serve a greater political cause.

We have no evidence of collusion to that end, but we do find it interesting that a copycat incident dealing with a galvanizing wedge issue pops up right before another Election Day.

Instead of playing off people's fears to make a point, free speech advocates would do better for their cause by showing more respect for those who don't feel a need to talk everywhere they go.

What do you make this stuff up? Are you a fiction writer?

I would have to ask Mr. Major which of his Constitutionally protected rights he feels he would " feel compelled to re-emphasize the importance of respecting others' rights in the exercise of your own?" Would his firt amendment right to an opinion fall into that category? Obviously not because his right to his opinion does not at all reflect my own but he had no problem stating it. Pennsylvania law allows for the open carry of a firearm. If you have a problem with that then I would suggest that you ask your state senator or representative to address the situation.