Bullet Boy on Shooting Sports

In a tragic event a Pistol Packing Mom was shot dead by husband while chatting on a web-cam in Lebanon, PA.

Meleanie Hain, 31, a second amendment advocate and champion became popular last year (2008) after carrying a holstered pistol to her child’s soccer game on September 11th.   The murder was witnessed live by a friend on the internet via web-chat by her husband.   The husband is reportedly to have committed suicide shortly after killing his wife.   The couples three children were at home during the horrific incident and were unharmed.

Read the article from the York Daily Record:

Gun-toting soccer mom shot, killed in Lebanon

By JOHN LATIMER

A Lebanon woman who gained national notoriety last year as a champion of Second Amendment rights after she brought her loaded handgun to her 5-year-old daughter’s soccer game was shot and killed Wednesday night in an apparent murder-suicide.Meleanie Hain, 31, and her husband Scott Hain, 33, were pronounced dead by Lebanon County coroner Dr. Jeffrey Yocum shortly after 8:30 p.m. after a two-hour standoff with police outside of their home at the corner of Second Avenue and East Grant Street. The episode ended quietly when police entered the house after trying to make contact with anyone inside.

No cause of death was announced, and autopsies were to be scheduled for today, said Yocum.

Lebanon police Chief Daniel Wright was guarded with information as detectives began the preliminary stages of the investigation late Wednesday night. He acknowledged that the Hains were both found dead and had suffered gunshot wounds inside their 1 ½-story brick home in a quiet neighborhood in Lebanon’s south side. He would not provide any additional details, other then to say that police do not feel any other people were involved.

District Attorney David Arnold, who was at the scene, refused to comment.

Several neighbors said they heard or saw the couple’s children run from the house screaming, “Daddy shot Mommy!” shortly before the 911 Center was called at 6:20 p.m.

The children, 2- and 6-year-old girls and a 10-year-old boy, were in the care of a neighbor and were unhurt, said Wright.

The Lebanon County Emergency Services Unit was quickly called to the scene and the neighborhood cordoned off.

The front door of the house was open and light could be seen inside the living room. But all inside and around the house was quiet as members of the Lebanon police and tactical team, armed with rifles, took up positions.

Petra Bossler, who lives next to the Hain home on Grant Street, said she did not hear any commotion or gunfire from the Hain home. She learned something had happened only when police came to her door and asked to come inside so they could peer from her windows at the Hain house, which is just several feet away.

Debbie Mise, who lives on East Grant Street, three doors away from the Hains, said she heard a strange sound followed by the screams of the children, which she mistook for playing.

“I heard something heavy drop or fall, and then right away I heard the kids screaming, but I thought they were playing,” she said. “It was loud. But it didn’t sound like a pop.”

Brian Witmer, who lives between Mise and Bossler said he saw Scott Hain mowing the lawn about 3:30 p.m. Wednesday.

“He was mowing his lawn, and the dog was outside. There was nothing out of the ordinary. He didn’t seem strange at all,” he said.

Mise said she had a feeling something bad would eventually happen at the Hain home.

“She just wasn’t right,” Mise said of Meleanie Hain. “You don’t bring a gun to a kids’ soccer game, and you don’t wear a gun when you go shopping at Kohl’s.”

Meleanie Hain was dubbed the pistol-packin’ soccer mom by the media in September 2008 after it was first reported in the Lebanon Daily News that she wore her holstered 9mm Glock pistol to her daughter’s soccer match. She became a spokeswoman of sorts for open-carry advocates — who support the right to carry a gun in the open — after complaints caused county Sheriff Mike DeLeo to confiscate her concealed-weapon permit.

Hain appealed the action, and after a hearing DeLeo was ordered to return the permit.

Hain did not let the matter end there. She filed a federal civil-rights lawsuit against DeLeo. That trial was awaiting scheduling in U.S. Middle District Court.

Meleanie Hain at last report operated a day care center in her home.

Her husband was a parole officer in Berks County and a former prison guard at the State Correctional Institute in Camp Hill. He also had worked part-time for Lebanon County Central Booking.

There is lots of chatter around that since Obama won the election on November 4th that he will take away the right to bear arms.   I must be honest with you and sooth your nerves.   Obama has no plans to take away your weapons.   People inside the gun world, Guns Stores, and the NRA used that as a scare tactic to get you to vote for John McCain.   And post election the gun store folks are keeping that fear alive.

If you are a frequent reader of my blog you know that I am an owner and supporter of weapons – especially insensible weapons.   The insensible weapons are the only ones that may be effected.   Very few people find an actual use for the .50 BMG weapons.   Now don’t get me wrong I would love to put one in my personal arsenal but see no true practical purpose of the weapon.   Plenty of other weapons will do exactly what the .50 will do.   The purpose of legislation to ban guns is to take them out of the hands of criminals.   Most everyone would be safe owning a bazooka but a select few people would not be.   By banning them it will be harder for the wrong people to get a hold of them.   The intent to ban weapons isn’t to strip you of your rights it is to make the US safer.   The problem isn’t the weapons it is enforcement.   Banning more guns will likely have little impact on the problems unless something can be done to correct the problem.

Its obvious we need stronger enforcement of laws in place – sure registering guns and serialization of bullets could help in the investigation – gun owners believe they have an implied right of privacy.

Another reason we don’t have to worry about a new weapons ban in the near future is that Washington DC has much more pressing issues to deal with –   the Economy.   The weapons industry plays a major role in our economy.   Many gun owners only buy American Made Goods and Ammo.   What about AR15 makers?   There are more US Based AR15 makers than I can count.   In fact the interstate commerce laws dictate that certain percentage of weapons be US made.   Manufacturing may happen oversees but final fit and manufacture is done by American Workers.   Gun owners typically buy from local gun shops and dealing locally keeps the money locally.   I can say that within the last 6 months I myself have payed $12,000 at one local gun shop and know that some people spend a lot more than that.   With the bottom up style of economics that we are going to move towards this is the type of enterprise we need.   If it is banned or governed it will certainly hurt the economy.

So here is my stick…   Fix the problems we have now with the gun control laws in place.   Leave new legislation alone.   Don’t go stir up something that doesn’t need to be messed with.   A note to the NRA Lobbyist that are highly paid…   When you go to congress trying to justify your pay – go with the Economic aspect of the weapon industry.   If you pass this XXX number of jobs will be lost and XXX revenue will be lost.   Put the fear of economy into the process and let the bills die in committee.

In my previous post I talked about the TTG Group in North Alabama e-mail list.   This story just came across the board and I thought I would share.   I have not done any personal investigating into the story myself but found it interesting.

Couple bring Smith & Wesson under fire with suit
By: Lynn LaRowe – Texarkana Gazette – Published: 07/30/2008

A Rosston, Ark., couple are suing Smith & Wesson in federal court because of a serious injury allegedly caused by a .460 Magnum revolver.

Todd Brown bought an S&W .460 Magnum revolver last fall. When he tried using it to shoot a deer the day after Christmas, gases escaping from the gun’s barrel severed his thumb, the suit alleges.

“Todd then lowered the gun to see if he had hit the deer, and as he was looking for the deer in the moments following the shot he saw blood shooting up in the air and on his gun and clothes, and he looked and saw that his thumb had been severed from his left hand and there was a deep gash in the flesh of the palm of his left hand extending up to his index finger …” the suit alleges.

Brown decided to purchase the weapon after watching a hunting show promoting the gun’s use to hunt bigger game, such as deer, the suit states. Brown bought the revolver, a scope and a holster from an authorized S&W dealer in Hope, Ark., on Dec. 21, 2007, for $1,896.58.

On Dec. 26, the opening day of the Christmas deer hunt, Brown tried to use the revolver to shoot a deer.

Monticello, Ark., attorney Cliff Gibson III filed the suit on Brown’s behalf July 18.

Smith & Wesson President and Chief Operating Officer Leland Nichols said the company could not comment on the suit and had not yet been served with a copy of the complaint.

The suit blames Brown’s injuries on alleged negligence by Smith & Wesson.

The first area of negligence the suit alleges is in the gun’s design. The suit asserts that S&W should have had the foresight to”design away” the risk of harm posed by”… the extraordinarily powerful gases expelled through the barrel-cylinder gap …”

The likelihood that a hunter might move a hand forward on the gun’s barrel when trying to site an animal should have been anticipated by S&W and factored into the gun’s design, the suit states.

“This negligence includes … the failure to reduce the length and weight of the gun barrel, the failure to increase the length of the cylinder, the failure to otherwise provide for better balance of the gun’s hefty weight, and the failure to provide a larger and more robust pistol grip for necessary two-handed firing of this heavy high-powered gun,” the complaint states.

S&W should have realized hunters in the woods won’t always have a convenient place to rest the weighty gun when firing, the suit alleges.

“Smith and Wesson consequently knew or had reason to know that while hunting in the woods and fields Todd Brown would have to support the heavy weight of this gun while shooting same solely by the strength of his hands and arms, thereby making it likely and probable that hunters, including Todd, would move his free hand forward and closer to the extremely dangerous barrel-cylinder gap in order to support and balance the gun while sighting-in the game,” the suit alleges.

The suit also alleges S&W failed to conduct enough testing on the gun before placing it on the market.

Warnings that might have alerted Todd Brown to the alleged dangers of the gun didn’t exist, the suit states.

“Further, Smith & Wesson was negligent in failing to give Todd Brown a reasonable and adequate warning and instruction respecting the nature, extent and severity of the danger of the devastating injury and harm (i.e. it will cut your hand off) presented to a shooter by its Model 460 Magnum Revolver,” the suit alleges.

The Browns are asking a jury in the Western District of Arkansas, El Dorado division, to award them damages for Todd Brown’s”… great, grievous and permanent injury to his person, past and future medical expense necessary to treat and care for his injuries, past and future pain, suffering and mental anguish, past and future loss of earnings, loss of earning capacity, and scars and disfigurement to his person,” the suit said.

They also want compensation for Kathy Brown’s”loss of consortium.”

What do you think?