May
22
Tuesday
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 |
Ssshhh: OH campaign finance ''reform'' aims to stiffle free speech
- Published on Wednesday, 30 November -0001 00:00
- Written by Jeff Garvas
Buried at the bottom of a Cleveland Plain Dealer story about a campaign finance reform bill that was unveiled by Republican state lawmakers Friday was this little bombshell:
Ohio lawmakers are planning their own version of McCain-Feingold's free-speech ban, right here in our state!
The only mention of the 30 days provision came as follows:
- Bill Todd, a lawyer who represents the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, said the bill's plan to ban issue ads 30 days before the election will hurt the ability of business and other nonaffiliated political players seeking to affect elections.
"Groups as diverse as the Sierra Club, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce and Ohio Right to Life are going to be restricted from communicating their messages during the period when Ohioans are most likely to be listening," he said. "I understand the need for campaign-finance reform, but it's always got to be balanced against the right to political speech."
What the media and politicians call special interests or big money for the most part turns out to be everyday voters.
The National Rifle Association, Sierra Club and even more nefarious groups like MoveOn.org and Swift Boat Veterans For Truth and POWS For Truth are, for the most part, made up of people who banded together to gain a spot at the table during the electoral process.
Now the Ohio legislature, with the backing of Governor Bob Taft, is using several fund-raising scandals to take away that voice by banning issue based political ads within thirty days of an election. Under the guise of reform they are, in fact, infringing on the First Amendment rights of everyday Ohioans.
They are also guaranteeing that control of the electoral process will be left to the two major political parties. Otherwise politicians would not raise the limit on individual contributions to $10,000 and then severely restrict the effectiveness of groups that can spend the money except for the two major political parties.
If this legislation passes as written, the average concerned citizen, on both sides of an issue, would now have to decide whether to donate to their issue-based advocacy group (that can no longer advertise during the most crucial time period) or give to the Party of their choice that has no such restriction.
Each Party also has a vested interest in keeping their often distorted version of the truth from being challenged. They also dont want their campaigns' messages damaged by "friends" like Michael Moore, who clearly hurt John Kerry in during his run for the White House.
Restricting issue-based ads during the last thirty days of an election cycle neatly addresses both concerns and can be listed among other important reforms.
But in reality, not only does it not "reform" campaign finance laws, but it chips away further at the rights of Ohioans and the control they have on the electoral process.
Commentary by Gerard Valentino, OFCC Central Ohio Coordinator