May
23
Wednesday
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 |
Why Employees Should Be Allowed to CCW
- Published on Wednesday, 30 November -0001 00:00
- Written by Daniel White
While the vast majority of businesses in Ohio do not post signs prohibiting customers from patronizing the establishment while legally carrying a firearm for self protection, many of them do have policies prohibiting employees from exercising that same right.
While on the surface it raises questions as to why they trust complete strangers more than they trust their own employees, there are bigger issues at stake.
Should businesses that deny employees the ability to defend themselves be liable if harm comes to that employee as a result of that policy? There are undoubtedly more than a few trial attorneys who would like the chance to answer that question.
(Click 'READ MORE' to continue...)
Business owners tend to focus on the negatives...
What if the employee has a bad day?
If a disgruntled employee is willing to break a law by committing homicide or felonious assault, that employee is not going to be deterred by a policy.
What if there is an accident?
A policy requiring a both valid license and a proper holster would ensure that the employee has knowledge of safe gun handling skills and the proper equipment. Firearms accidents involving an untouched, holstered firearm are virtually nonexistent.
Won't I incur additional liability?
No! In fact, you may incur additional liability if an employee is injured or killed by a criminal attack and was unable to defend himself.
Is there any proof that allowing employees to be legally armed is beneficial?
Plenty! In fact, several recent incidents in the news highlight the benefits.
Everyone recalls the shooting at the Jeep Plant in Toledo last January. Despite a policy prohibiting firearms, a disgruntled employee showed up with a shotgun and shot three co-workers, killing one of them. Had the policy not been in place, it is possible that one of the victims would have been able to halt the attack.
In Albuquerque, New Mexico, a clerk at a bookstore stopped an armed robber without injury thanks to her legally carried firearm.
A Windsor, Colorado store owner was cleared of all charges this week after a shooting this summer when he stopped a robbery attempt.
A York County, PA store owner is alive today because he was able to defend himself when three robbers started shooting during a hold-up. All three suspects are in custody, and the store owner was not charged.
The right to self-defense extends to all persons at all times. Policies denying that right, whether to customers or employees, do nothing but render them helpless in the face of violent criminals who have no regard for laws or store policies.