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 |
SCORE: First Amendment 1; US Senate Democrats 0
- Published on Friday, 19 January 2007 16:31
- Written by Jeff Garvas
An amendment to United States Senate Bill number one (Section 220) almost succeeded in putting the brakes on grassroots activism. Yesterday, the US Senate stripped out language that would require "grassroots causes" and "bloggers" who communicate to 500 or more members of the public on policy matters to register and report quarterly to Congress.
Had it become law, the best case would have been that Ohioans For Concealed Carry may have had to take intrusive and bureaucratic precautions when encouraging our members to support or oppose efforts by Congress. The worst case would have been to abandon those efforts entirely due to an inability to properly report our efforts on a quarterly basis.
Those provisions may or may not have applied to this organization and its website columnists as well as any other gun rights group or online commentary about firearms in the United States. OFCC's email alert list, our incredibly popular Firearms Freedom Podcast, and our discussion forums alone would qualify as "communicating to 500 or more members of the public" - triggering an obligation to report our activities of grassroots activism to Congress as if we were a power house lobbying firm. However, unions and most corporations would be exempt since they'd communicate with their "members" as opposed to the general public.
On January 9th, the Senate passed an amendment to the bill that would create criminal penalties. Online activists or organizations that failed to report themselves quarterly could be charged with a crime. At risk to those who didn't know better would be up to one year of jail time for the crime of exercising your First Amendment right to freedom of speech.
When the Senate called the question, seven (7) Democrats joined all forty-eight (48) Republicans to repeal Section 220. Forty-three (43) Democrats voted to keep the restrictive provision in place. Ohio's Senate delegation was split. Voinovich voted to repeal and Senator Brown voted to retain the onerous reporting language. What should scare every freedom loving person is how this and the criminal penalties for political free speech managed to become a part of the bill in the first place.
Worse yet, there are now forty-three Democrats on record who would make it a crime to speak your mind about political efforts to "too many" people. In other words, the more people your statements and political beliefs attract the less effective those Democrats want you to be.
While large organizations like the National Rifle Association would most likely find ways to comply with such constitutional manipulation, smaller activist blogs and grassroots volunteer efforts like Ohioans For Concealed Carry would certainly be harmed the most -- effectively putting a muzzle on those who would fear prosecution and reconsider grassroots activism.