Why continue with them?

I agree with Matt Yglesias on this ...

There’s been so much focus on the spectacle of the whole thing that nobody’s really stepped back and explained what the purpose of these events are other than to give us pundits something to chat about. Obviously this is not a good way of acquiring statistically valid information about your constituents’ opinions. And it doesn’t seem like a mode of endeavor likely to increase the popularity of the politician holding the town hall. The upside is extremely limited, and you’re mostly just exposing yourself to the chance that something could go wrong.

It's fairly obvious these things have been utterly hijacked by a combination of organized right-wing groups whose primary goal is to shout down those who offering contrasting ideas and misinformed citizens, the vast majority of them being senior citizens who don't wish to be forced onto government health care plan yet absolutely love their government-run, single-payer system of Medicare. There's no way this can be used to either effectively gauge a full measure of support or opposition to the proposed reforms, and it's not plausible to utilize town halls as an educational opportunity given the level of calculated disruption at these things.

They've become a place where sheer lunacy is being accepted as part of the mainstream narrative, and that's drowning out what ought to be a pretty good debate of how to reform the system.

I'm perfectly content in defending my support of the public insurance option, but it's borderline impossible to do that with someone who's hollering until their blue in the face about 'trampling on the Constitution' and believes that 'death panels' are going to start executing the elderly. Factoring in the real possibility that somone might actually get hurt at one of these things in the very near future, why keep hosting them?