May
21
Monday
OFCC Sues City of Cleveland Heights, Ohio
The sign you see here is posted in Cleveland Heights Parks implying possession of a firearm is a crime.
On Friday August 12th, 2011 Ohioans For Concealed Carry Filed a lawsuit against the City the City of Cleveland Heights. The litigation comes after many attempts to resolve concerns over laws that Cleveland Heights not only allowed to remain on their books, but also posted signs at their parks that continue to imply it is illegal to be armed. The City of Cleveland Heights has chosen to ignore our attempts at civil discourse. When individuals have contacted them representing themselves as residents of the City of Cleveland Heights their concerns apparently fell on deaf ears. When representatives of the organization have formally contacted the city's legal representation they've been laughed at and hung up on by the Law Director. It is this arrogance and refusal to work with Ohioans For Concealed Carry that has forced us to seek a remedy through the courts.
Our press release follows. Read the Full Story
Our press release follows. Read the Full Story
Canton PD Event Leads to New OFCC Legislation
When officer Harless of the Canton, Ohio police department came upon a vehicle stopped in the roadway most of us were focused on getting restaurant carry legislation signed into law.
What took place that evening has become an international viral video, calls for the resignation of the City Council president, and criminal charges against a man who is clearly heard trying to state that he has a license.
Ohioans For Concealed Carry has not just raised thousands of dollars in a legal defense fund, but we've written legislation to resolve this matter that Representative Danny Bubp has stated he's going to introduce this fall
Read the Full Story
Search OhioCCW
Join OFCC Today!
Upcoming Events
| 2012 Party In The Park When: August - TBD |
Temporary Emergency License system in need of attention
- Published on Wednesday, 30 November -0001 00:00
- Written by Jeff Garvas
August 12, 2004
Akron Beacon Journal
Convicted Akron felon released on technicality
Victim fears for life after Appeals Court decision
An Akron man's assault conviction was thrown out on a technicality Wednesday, giving him his freedom and putting his victim in fear for his life.
In its decision, the 9th District Court of Appeals ruled that Summit County prosecutors failed to prove a fundamental aspect of criminal law: identifying where the crime occurred.
The decision frees 26-year-old Stanley J. Myers Jr. from serving the rest of his three-year prison sentence for felonious assault against his uncle.
The uncle, Ted Myers of North Canton, said he fears for his life with his nephew's looming release. He said a dispute with his brother and two nephews -- one of whom is Stanley Myers -- remains unresolved.
"Am I afraid? Absolutely I'm afraid. They promised they would put me in a grave, and now they may have the chance,'' Ted Myers said. "There's no doubt in my mind. I'm a dead man.''
Commentary:
When House Bill 12 was passed into law, the legislature's intent was to have replaced Ohio's flawed affirmative defense system (which rendered persons who carried firearms for self-defense guilty until they could prove themselves innocent) with a legal method to bear arms for self-defense that could be exercised almost immediately. As soon as a person realizes they are in danger, the legislature intended to have provided them with a legal method of bearing arms for self-defense - the temporary emergency license (TEL).
Almost immediately, several sheriffs throughout the state of Ohio began sharing their personal disdain for the new law by refusing to issue the licenses. One Franklin Co. resident, who has been victimized by a window peeker/ stalker, has sued that county's sheriff after being told that her reasons were not good enough. The Ohio Supreme Court has agreed to consider arguments on her case.
The intent of the General Assembly was that victims in Ohio do not have to divulge specific, embarrassing details of their victimization, and do not have to submit to the intimidation of a discretionary process to exercise self defense.
No rape victim should have to sit down in front of a strange man in a sheriff's office to describe her trauma in order to be able to obtain a legal means of protecting herself. No victim of assault, upon learning that his attacker has been release from prison, should have to wait three days for a sheriff to approve his "emergency" license, or to be denied, again, because his reason isn't good enough. The General Assembly did not give sheriffs discretion in this matter - if the applicant qualifies, the law says they SHALL be issued a TEL immediately.
OFCC has learned that very few people in Ohio have been able to take advantage of the TEL opportunity in the first 90 days (details to follow). This is wrong, and if certain sheriffs refuse to fix it, we must again petition our legislators to do so.
Related Stories:
Franklin Co. Sheriff needs help with the definition of ''OR''
Ohio Supreme Court to hear lawsuit against Franklin Co. Sheriff Karnes