May 24
Thursday
image image
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
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

An Open Letter


...to our counterparts at Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence, Brady Campaign, Violence Policy Center, Freedom States Alliance, et al.

What then? Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, you manage to get every one of your pieces of dream legislation passed. Will you then fold up your tents and move on? Or will you, like most organizations that "work themselves out of job," expand your original mission statements to embrace heretofore unrecognized threats to our safety?

My money's on the latter. Of course, I sincerely hope it never comes to that. I'm not naïve enough to think you'll ever be convinced of the fallacy of your positions, but I do have faith in the common sense of the average citizen when presented with actual facts rather than the emotional rhetoric supplied both directly by you, and through the (generally) sympathetic-to-your-cause media.

Let's be frank. You and I both know you won't be happy until you've completely outlawed the private ownership of firearms. What then? ...on to banning knives? Seems to be the wave of the future in one of your favorite examples, England. Of course, that whole firearms banning thing doesn't seem to have had much effect on their criminal element, but I guess I'm just nitpicking. Sorry - didn't mean to bring facts into it.

So, where was I? Oh, yeah. OK, you've gotten President Hillary (let's not be coy - that is what you're hoping for) to sign legislation saying all my guns are illegal. How will I be compensated for the government's taking of my property? And how will it be done? How will you know - no, I mean really KNOW - I've been a good subject - er, citizen - and turned them in? And since you've now taken away the one truly effective means I have for personal defense, how will you ensure my safety? Up to that moment, I'll have taken a large degree of personal responsibility for it. Now what? I'm 5'4" and 140 pounds soaking wet - and old, slow, and weak. And careful though I may be, there really are bad people out there. Shall I use harsh words with them?

So, back to my original question - what then? I'd really like to know.

Sincerely,
Kim D. Campbell