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 |
Supreme Court Denies Beatty v. Toledo Appeal
- Published on Wednesday, 24 January 2007 14:32
- Written by Jeff Garvas
On Wednesday the Ohio Supreme Court denied an appeal in Beatty v. Toledo, in which Ohioans For Concealed Carry had joined efforts with Mr. Beatty to pursue an appeal of the Sixth District's absurd decision. Many regular readers of our website will recall that the Sixth District Court of Appeals concluded in Beatty that Ohio's concealed carry law is "not a general law" due to the fact that HB12 permits a private property owner to choose if their property is prohibited or not.
The appellate court concluded that this was not a "uniform and consistent" statewide application of the law, and therefor argued that local governments could pass conflicting and more severe ordinances such as prohibition in a park. Without reason the Ohio Supreme Court rejected the appeal - quite possibly because there is no conflicting opinion from a different district.
The silver lining to this cloud is that the Supreme Court acted before we could appeal the Ohioans For Concealed Carry v. Clyde case and attempt to join them in a combined appeal. Our appeal in that case sits in the Sixth District Court and could permit us to challenge that courts previous ruling. In the Beatty case much was rested on precedent set in Am. Financial Servs. Assn. v. Cleveland, which the Ohio Supreme Court overturned: Am. Financial Servs. Assn. v. Cleveland, 112 Ohio St.3d 170, 2006-Ohio-6043..
Ohioans For Concealed Carry will continue the fight to eliminate any notion of the idea that Ohio's Concealed carry law is anything less than a general law. Even if we do not prevail in reversing the Sixth District Court of Appeals we believe that Ohio House Bill 347 will serve as a safety net by prohibiting any local gun laws. Now is as good a time as any other to consider a contribution to Ohioans For Concealed Carry to help us pursue these efforts and protect your rights in the courts.