May
24
Thursday
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 |
Bob Taft Threatens to Veto HB347.... Ho Hum...
- Published on Wednesday, 30 November -0001 00:00
- Written by Jeff Garvas
The Columbus Dispatch had this interesting story over the weekend: Governor threatens to veto gun bill
Unless two major provisions being pushed by gun advocates are taken out of a bill that would revise Ohios conceal carry law, Gov. Bob Taft wont sign it.But something big has happened between the time when Ohioans were cringing at the idea that Bob Taft might threaten another concealed carry veto and today -- two years after the law has been overwhelmingly successful.
Supporters say the bill will close loopholes and clean up the states nearly 2-year-old gun law, and it should pass out of a House committee by the end of March, said Rep. Robert E. Latta, R-Bowling Green, the committee chairman.
(Click 'READ MORE' to Continue)
Bob Taft is a convicted, disgraced Governor whose approval ratings are probably lower than today's interest rates. He is on his way out the door in a matter of months, and not a single candidate running for Governor has wanted to be associated with him. The campaign to re-elect George Bush distanced itself from Bob Taft.
This begs the question. Who cares about a Taft Veto at this point? Ironically, today's political climate would be friendlier to passing a clean House Bill 12 than any other time in the past seven years of Bob Taft as Governor. If we knew what we know today, we could have bought him some greens time back in 1999...
As you may recall, the Ohio State Highway Patrol was a thorn in the side of HB12 and primarily responsible for the "plain sight" provisions of HB12. The story continues:
Sponsor Rep. James Aslanides said revised wording will address the patrols concerns about guns in vehicles.Sounds like the Ohio State Highway Patrol is backing down, right? Bob Taft's strangle hold on killing sound gun legislation is slipping away friends. But it continues:
"They seemed very pleased with what weve done," the Coshocton Republican said, declining to offer details until the changes are completed.
Lt. Shawn Davis, of the State Highway Patrol, said officials there have not seen those changes and would prefer that the current law remain untouched.
Aslanides does not expect to rework tighter limits on access to public records. "Were not too concerned about the governors position at this point," Aslanides said.Neither are we Jim, and we have you to thank for it.