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
Bill seeks to protect firearms industry from suits
- Published on Wednesday, 30 November -0001 00:00
- Written by Jeff Garvas
February 19, 2005
Washington Times
Congress is again attempting to shield the firearms industry from civil liability lawsuits filed by third parties seeking damages for the criminal use of a gun.
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is likely to pass the House much the same way it did when first introduced in 2003, on a bipartisan vote of 285-to-140. The bill never made it out of the Senate.
Democrats tacked on amendments to the bill that would have extended the assault weapons ban, required sellers at gun shows to conduct FBI criminal background checks, as well as made mandatory the inclusion of trigger locks with all handgun sales.
Extending the assault weapons ban is a deal breaker for a majority of Senate Republicans, said the bill's Senate sponsor, Sen. Larry E. Craig. "I don't think any of those amendments have value," the Idaho Republican said. "The industry, to protect themselves, is voluntarily including trigger locks already, so I don't see where that's necessary."
He said the argument to close the so-called gun show loophole is an attempt to undermine "a valuable commerce tool."
All federally licensed gun dealers are required to conduct criminal background checks on their customers, Mr. Craig said, but private citizens selling firearms at gun shows are not. He said such a requirement could push people out of the shows and into the streets, where the government loses all ability to track the sales.
Senate Democrats are expected to oppose the bill outright and introduce some of the same amendments with some alterations.
Click here for the entire article from the Washington Times.



