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 |
PLCAA Upheld in New York
- Published on Monday, 19 May 2008 06:32
- Written by Daniel White
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, passed by the U.S. congress in 2005, was credited as the cause of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals striking down an earlier ruling against Beretta U.S.A. Corp.
Beretta had been sued by New York City, at the direction of Billionaire anti-gun Mayor Michael Bloomberg, alleging the company was responsible for the use of their firearms by criminals. This is exactly the type of frivolous lawsuit the PLCAA was enacted to prevent, and the Court did the right thing.
It has long been a strategy of the anti-gun lobby to find a way around what they see as a failure to act of the legislature. It was hoped that activist judges would accomplish their gun control goals by making it too expensive for manufacturers to stay in business. 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has verified that the PLCAA has teeth and that the will of the legislature is upheld. Holding a business responsible for the criminal misuse of their product is something that only makes sense to the most unscrupulous of lawyers and those who would only use it as a tool to achieve their own short-sighted goals.