 |
The Public Opinion Soapbox Welcome to the Public Opinion's community message board. You must be registered to post, and all posts are subject to moderation by our staff.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Shea T
Joined: 17 Dec 2007 Posts: 3 Location: Greencastle
|
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EdGeb69 wrote: | On this carry matter with Mr. Rotz. Carrying a firearm is a responsiblility.
That means that you carry it responsibly. If you want to carry concealed then by all means carry it concealed. That means not flashing it in public or allowing others to be aware that you are armed. When you allow your firearm to be exposed, you are putting yourself and others at risk of harm. Mr. Rotz started this when he got out of his vehicle with his weapon exposed. No that is not a violation of the law, however it was in poor judgement or lack of judgement on his part. I support the Sheriff in what he did. If you act irresponsibly, then there should be repercussions for your actions. There were people at that polling place that were probably very concerned about their safety and "flashing" a weapon is not the sign of a responsible person. |
Open carry is legal Pa, open carry is legal at Pa polls. Mr. Rotz did nothing wrong by carrying his gun while voting, yet you think he should be punished for it? I can not comprehend this way of thinking Sir. Should you be pulled over and fined for speeding while going the speed limit, just because the officer doesn't like the make or model of car you drive? That is the same situation as this. An innocent man is being put through the ringer here, I am alittle concerned that only a few people are outraged by this. Regardless of how you feel about guns, for or against, this is an injustice that is costing you and me money because a exiting sheriff is trying to make some power play at the end of his term in office. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Irish1
Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Posts: 60 Location: Montgomery Township
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not sure if anyone has asked the following?
Is Mr. Rotz still allowed to carry open if his conceal permit is revoked, and can he still carry concealed until his hearing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
.45chel

Joined: 26 Oct 2007 Posts: 2754 Location: Chambersburg
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
open carry only _________________ I demand euphoria! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
me
Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Posts: 119
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Right on Shea T.
Had the Constable told someone they could not wear a certain type of T-shirt, could not speak their opinion to others outside the polls about candidates, could not go in with a Cross or Star of David around their neck or without putting one on, they would be screaming bloody murder, BUT since it involves a weapon, they see no problem with this blatant violation of Mr. Rotz's civil rights !!!! _________________ Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and like it, never really care for anything else thereafter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
A Talking Horse

Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Posts: 139 Location: Cove Gap
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| me wrote: | Right on Shea T.
Had the Constable told someone they could not wear a certain type of T-shirt...they would be screaming bloody murder, BUT since it involves a weapon, they see no problem with this blatant violation of Mr. Rotz's civil rights !!!! |
Wrong - You are not allowed to wear a t-shirt or button with your candidates name on it to the polls. (Thats the 1st amendment - Freedom of Speech...)
Why do we so calmly accept this minor restriction of our 1st amendment rights - yet scream "bloody murder" when it involves the 2nd amendment.???
Why do we say "no problem" when it comes to the 1st amendment??? _________________ Do everything that's in you, you feel to be your part... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dave
Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Posts: 162
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Like I've said, anyone who feels the need to carry a gun everywhere they go needs to get professional help.
After hearing from all the "carriers" in the area, I'm more afraid of getting shot by these "protectors" than I am a criminal. If I get held up at gunpoint & one of these vigilaties starts shooting........
So one of these carriers geta gun pointed at them by a thug, do they try the quick draw? Do they practice a quick draw? Or does the thug just get a new gun to rob someone else with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
A Talking Horse

Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Posts: 139 Location: Cove Gap
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dave wrote: | Like I've said, anyone who feels the need to carry a gun everywhere they go needs to get professional help.
After hearing from all the "carriers" in the area, I'm more afraid of getting shot by these "protectors" than I am a criminal. If I get held up at gunpoint & one of these vigilaties starts shooting........
So one of these carriers geta gun pointed at them by a thug, do they try the quick draw? Do they practice a quick draw? Or does the thug just get a new gun to rob someone else with. |
As soon as the bullets start flying - how can you tell the good guys from the bad guys...? How do you know who fired the first shot...? _________________ Do everything that's in you, you feel to be your part... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
me
Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Posts: 119
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:08 pm Post subject: WHOAAAAA |
|
|
| A Talking Horse wrote: | | me wrote: | Right on Shea T.
Had the Constable told someone they could not wear a certain type of T-shirt...they would be screaming bloody murder, BUT since it involves a weapon, they see no problem with this blatant violation of Mr. Rotz's civil rights !!!! |
Wrong - You are not allowed to wear a t-shirt or button with your candidates name on it to the polls. (Thats the 1st amendment - Freedom of Speech...)
Why do we so calmly accept this minor restriction of our 1st amendment rights - yet scream "bloody murder" when it involves the 2nd amendment.???
Why do we say "no problem" when it comes to the 1st amendment??? |
HEY Horse, if you're going to quote me, please quote the entire statement. If ya notice, I listed a CERTAIN TYPE of shirt and no mention of a candidate as I am aware. I personally was instructed to remove a campaign button some years ago.
But since you mentioned it, yes, we should also be allowed a shirt, buttons, tatoos or whatever of whatever candidate we so choose. But if ya look deep enough, I'm sure the reason goes back to some "do good" politician trying to level the playing field.
I don't care what Ammendment it is, if it's been violated, IT's WRONG!!!!!
My position and that of many others is the opposite of yours. When 2nd Ammendment is violated, it's a different story and OK in the eyes of some !!! _________________ Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and like it, never really care for anything else thereafter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Curious
Joined: 14 Nov 2007 Posts: 34
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| No electioneering is allowed in the polling place. This includes buttons, shirts, hats, pamphlets and signs. You can discuss the candidates freely until you are within 10 feet of the door of the polling place and thenyou enter the campaign free zone. This regulation is an attempt to ensure fair and free elections. Why can't you grasp that fact??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
me
Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Posts: 119
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Curious,
I fully understand AND support the electioneering/ campaigning restrictions. What I and others are referring to is a VOTER not being able to wear a button, hat, shirt etc. That is a violation of free speech/ expression !!!!! _________________ Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and like it, never really care for anything else thereafter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Coppy

Joined: 28 Oct 2007 Posts: 2267 Location: Chambersburg
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| me wrote: | Curious,
I fully understand AND support the electioneering/ campaigning restrictions. What I and others are referring to is a VOTER not being able to wear a button, hat, shirt etc. That is a violation of free speech/ expression !!!!! |
No, it's not; that voting area should be free of influence from anyone or anything. This is no more a violation of your free speech than requiring shoes and shirts to be worn in public buildings. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
armed_citizen

Joined: 27 Oct 2007 Posts: 212 Location: Chambersburg, PA
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dave wrote: | Like I've said, anyone who feels the need to carry a gun everywhere they go needs to get professional help.
|
While I don't claim to represent all those who carry firearms, I have contact with many by phone, e-mail and other bulletin boards and do believe that many feel as I do. All that being said, here is my personal stance. I do not believe that I "need" to carry a firearm everywhere I go. I believe that there is no such thing as a "safe place", and that I could be in a position where I need to defend myself or my family at any time. I choose to carry a firearm so that if the "need" ever does present itself, I am as prepared as possible to deal with it. If I were truly as paranoid as you seem to think "carriers" are, I'd be constantly peeking from behind the curtains waiting to snipe at anyone who crosses my property line. This is simply not the case.
| Dave wrote: |
After hearing from all the "carriers" in the area, I'm more afraid of getting shot by these "protectors" than I am a criminal. If I get held up at gunpoint & one of these vigilaties starts shooting........
|
I am not your protector. I am the protector of myself and my family. The law does provide for the defense of others (Title 18, §506), but has limitations. PA has weaker personal defense laws than some other states. Unless in your home or place of work, you are required to retreat if possible to do so "in complete safety", before employing deadly force. This means if I see you being held up, I can't just start shooting (nor would I). My recourse would be to call for help on your behalf, be a good witness and provide a description of your assailant, and let the police do their job. Were I to witness someone in the process of being raped or murdered, I would have more legal standing to employ deadly force, but personally would still be hesitant to do so. Even a fully justified shooting would take an untold toll on the life and family of the shooter. The last thing they need is the victim they assisted piling on. This reality would make me very hesitant to employ a firearm in any situation that was not a direct threat to myself, my family, or very close friends (whose position on such things I would know). Because there are people who share your stance (no offense intended), I must be very cautious when considering rendering aid to someone who may need it. _________________ Author assumes full responsibility for the content of their posts. Opinions expressed on this website are not necessarily those of the Public Opinion, its editor, publisher, Board or affiliated parties. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Coppy

Joined: 28 Oct 2007 Posts: 2267 Location: Chambersburg
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think Dave has considered the possibility of a zombie uprising, in which case, I would think carrying a concealed weapon could be beneficial.
Not to be smug, but there are certainly two trains of thought here. I completely understand the position that people carrying guns around for the benefit of personal safety may be bordering (if nor exceeding) paranoia. Heck, here in rural America, your chances of requiring the use of a concealed weapon are pretty much nil.
I don't feel the need to take a gun with me everywhere I go; plus it could make shopping for pants a cumbersome experience. Because most people don't see the need in doing this, it's hard for us to understand why you need to armed_cit. I don't think anyone's trying to take away your constitutional rights, but it does seem a bit silly. And frankly, I'm not particularly comfortable with the idea of a society where people need to carry guns everywhere. I'm happy to not be living in the Wild West.
Then again, you seem to be part of a gun culture that some of are not so it's hard for us to understand your position. I'm not trying to understand either; I don't see the need and I never will. The PO reported about a year ago on a guy who accidentally shot himself in his car sitting in the parking lot of Gander Mountain. Another guy got shot at for passing someone on double-lined, rural road.
So I have to ask; do you keep your gun in a holster at your side ready should the "need" present itself? That seems like overkill; this isn't Compton. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
armed_citizen

Joined: 27 Oct 2007 Posts: 212 Location: Chambersburg, PA
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Coppy,
I have heard tell of this coming zombie uprising, but it's pretty low on my list of 'scenarios'.
I agree completely that there are two different sides, and some folks fall somewhere in the middle. It's not my intention to evangelize everyone to do as I do. What I do is my choice. I encourage everyone to make their own decisions and exercise or not exercise any freedoms they choose.
The Chambersburg area is quickly losing it's 'rural' feel. Even the outlying areas are not untouched. I think of the woman in State Line who was killed for her car by the mass murderer from Texas. And just two weeks ago an elderly couple near McConellsburg experienced a home invasion, were tied up while their home was robbed and their car was stolen.
Again, I do NOT "need" to take a firearm everywhere I go. I CHOOSE to do so, in case a "need" arises.
I remember the story at Gander Mountain. Something seems to stick in my mind that it was an off-duty police officer?? I'm also aware of the 'road rage' incident you mentioned. I don't know if the party who fired the gun was legally possessing it or not (in PA you are required to have a LTCF for carry in a vehicle), but even if he was, his decision to actually fire it for such a reason is idiotic.
I carry my firearm in a holster. I believe it is safer there than left in my locked vehicle where it is out of my sight and control, though having it my vehicle is still better than it being at home. How and where (on one's person) a firearm is carried can vary depending on the model being carried, weather, type of dress, etc. Simply shoving a firearm into a purse, bag or even pocket is not safe unless the trigger is protected. Using a holster accomplishes this.
*edited to fix typo _________________ Author assumes full responsibility for the content of their posts. Opinions expressed on this website are not necessarily those of the Public Opinion, its editor, publisher, Board or affiliated parties.
Last edited by armed_citizen on Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Coppy

Joined: 28 Oct 2007 Posts: 2267 Location: Chambersburg
|
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A well-stated response, and I can't say I have anything else to add other than I can't argue with it. What's your right within the boundaries of the law are simply that.
So, that said, if the zombies do come, you're covered... at least temporarily. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|