|
Written by Jeff Garvas
|
|
Saturday, 29 March 2008 |
|
Recently we received a submission from OFCC supporter B. Clark showing just how powerful well written letters can convince public officials of their innocent mistakes. Thanks for Mike Kinsey's article Hamilton Township Removing Illegal "No Guns" signs! I used this same letter to inform the Tallmadge City law Director of Public Service to relocate the gun signs in our parks to the building locations.
It's always great to hear when others can reproduce success with the same initial effort. This isn't the first time OFCC or someone who has recreated what OFCC had done has been successful in this very same manner. If your local government is posting illegal signs that prohibit concealed carry where they shouldn't pick up the phone and start making noise -- just do it professionally and calmly, making your point without threatening to sue or seek OFCC's involvement.
When presented with the facts most officials will realize what they or others in their community have done wrong and rectify the situation. The individual from Tallmadge further asked: If these signs get posted on open air type picnic pavilions (a roof covering picnic tables with no enclosed sides), are these considered buildings?
The unfortunate answer is we just can't tell you. In some cases or legal definitions these structures are considered buildings. In other cases they require four walls to be deemed a building. The unfortunate problem here is that if they are posted or not, if a court considers them to be government buildings, you have no excuse for being within them. The way Ohio's sign law works you must "know" that you entered a posted private business to be guilty, but when it comes to government buildings the lack of a conspicuous sign is irrelevant. Enter community picnic shelters at your own risk. |
|
Written by Gene Helms
|
|
Monday, 17 March 2008 |
U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement has filed a brief for the imminent Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller that will allow the highest court in the land to rule whether or not the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is an individual right like every other that is enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Clement asked that the case be remanded to the DC Circuit Court to see if the law can withstand “intermediate scrutiny” under the Second Amendment. His reasoning is that,
Although the Court of Appeals correctly held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, it did not apply the correct standard for evaluating respondent’s Second Amendment claim.
The Court of Appeals appears to be using a categorical approach where Second Amendment could be construed to categorically preclude any ban on a category of “Arms” that can be traced back to the founding era of our nation. If the Supreme Court of the United States were to analyze this case in the same way, it could cast doubt on the constitutionality of existing federal legislation banning the possession of certain types of firearms, including machine guns.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Thursday, 13 March 2008 |
The Knox Report
From the Firearms Coalition
By Jeff Knox
The media and gun control advocates insist that the easy availability of firearms is a problem; that increased firepower equals increased death toll; that the key to stopping armed violence is restricting gun sales and prohibiting lawful firearm possession in certain public places. They’re wrong. They have always been wrong and their misguided tampering comes with a very high price – people’s lives.
In the past year there have been a number of very high profile cases of a lone lunatic walking into a public place and indiscriminately shooting people. Such incidents are aberrations, unpredictable, unstoppable, and relatively unusual. The best indicator that someone might attempt such an atrocity is not how available guns are or how efficient background checks are conducted, but the level of news coverage generated by the last such tragedy because so many of these cowards are motivated by a desire for their own 15 minutes of fame. Since the media refuses to stop rewarding these murderers, the best that can be hoped for is to mitigate the damage when they strike. In the final analysis, the difference between a crazed bad guy killing several people and a crazed bad guy killing dozens of people is almost always the length of time it takes for good guys with guns to arrive on the scene. Three attacks in the past year offer graphic proof of this fact.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Gene Helms
|
|
Wednesday, 12 March 2008 |
Would you let your children go to school without the proper inoculations to protect them from disease? Would you let them go without a coat to protect them from the cold? Laws have been passed that require children to be protected against the many diseases that are out there and Children Services would take your children away from you if you disregard their health, safety, or well-being. So why do we think so little about sending our children into harm's way by disarming the faculty and students, on campus, that are of legal age? How can we keep letting the right of self-defense of our school faculty and students be infringed upon?
Over the last year we have had mass shootings at Northern Illinois University, Virginia Tech, and many others. The students and faculty were left completely helpless as they came face to face with pure evil. Many families have lost loved ones due to prohibitions mandated by our government. It is time to take back our right to defend ourselves.
One person with a concealed carry license and the legal right to carry on campus could have made a great deal of difference in how many people have been harmed in these incidents.
In 2004, Utah’s state legislature passed a law that prevents public universities from banning legal guns on campus. In an article published by sunjournal.com, Bryce Eastlick, director of business operations for the group Students for Concealed Carry on Campus said that twelve states are considering similar legislation and Virginia, Washington, and Arizona will be writing up bills this spring.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Mike Kinsey
|
|
Tuesday, 11 March 2008 |
I have been in contact with the trustees of Hamilton Township in Southwest Ohio and their legal counsel for the past few months and am pleased to report that they will be removing all improperly posted "No Guns" signs that have been at the entrance to township parks.
As we all know, Section 2923.126 (B)(9) of the Ohio Revised Code is very clear in stating that only publicly owned buildings prohibit self-defense for licensed individuals and entire public lands can not have this restriction. In addition, the preemption law that OFCC fought so hard to pass last year mandates that townships can not impose stricter regulations regarding firearms than what is outlined in state law.
An OFCC member that wishes to remain anonymous brought this to our attention and we are happy that the issue has been resolved. Hamilton Township officials were polite and attentive during the process.
If your local park (or any other public land) has "No Guns" signs improperly posted to apply to something other than a publicly owned building, feel free to use the following letter as a basis for your own contact to remove the illegal signs.
Dear Sir/Madam:
I am contacting you as a concerned citizen regarding improperly
posted "No Guns" signs at Hamilton Township parks. I am sure that township trustees want to follow Ohio law as outlined below and will remove the illegal signs as soon as possible.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Mike Kinsey
|
|
Saturday, 08 March 2008 |
This hearing has been postponed.
Ohioans For Concealed Carry is a long-time proponent of Castle Doctrine legislation and member Gary Witt will provide testimony in support of SB 184 on behalf of OFCC at the next Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. The next meeting is scheduled for 10 AM on Wednesday March 12, 2008 in the North Hearing Room.
There are four bills on the Committee’s schedule for hearing on this date and the time that SB 184 will be heard is unknown. OFCC members and supporters are encouraged to attend this hearing and support our position on the bill. Members who have blue OFCC shirts are encouraged to wear them. |
|
Written by Jeff Garvas
|
|
Friday, 07 March 2008 |
Cleveland's Channel 5 news has a story out of Lima that demonstrates the cost of zero tolerance on our children: Police Arrest Girl Who Says She Took Knife To School To Cut Apple.
Zero tolerance policies are school official's answer to mass casualty shootings (where, quite honestly, the shooters were not hindered by the fact that murder is a serious criminal offense). Its somewhat of a given to say that you can't have a gun in a school as a child. But to say that key chains that look like a "weapon" are punishable, or my favorite, the children expelled for playing cops and robbers with finger-guns, is asinine at best.
We are expelling and punishing children (or in this case, young adults) who have no intent to do harm.
From the article:
School officials suspended the 17-year-old and police charged her with delinquency by possession of a deadly weapon on school property.
Police said the girl did not threaten anyone.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Harry Bryan
|
|
Thursday, 28 February 2008 |
Would you like to see an OFCC member in Congress?
Here's your chance. Richard Stobbs is running in the 6th District for the seat vacated by Ted Strickland when he was elected governor. Dick has been a multi-year member of OFCC and has a concealed handgun license. He is an NRA Life Member and was a firearms instructor for decades.
Mr. Stobbs has over 30 years of public service, including serving as Sheriff of Belmont County 1981-85 and 11 years in Federal Service, including 3 years as a Criminal Justice Specialist with the U. S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C. Mr. Stobbs currently works in a local agency and is a Lifetime Certified Law Enforcement Instructor in Ohio. Dick was a volunteer firefighter and emergency squad member with the Colerain Volunteer Fire Company. Mr. Stobbs has a BBA degree from Ohio University, Law Enforcement Associates degree from Jefferson Community College and Masters in Administration from Central Michigan University.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Saturday, 23 February 2008 |
The National Rifle Association is currently accepting applications through March 1st from outstanding high school sophomores and juniors to participate in the 12th Annual Youth Education Summit July 7th-13th.
Approximately 40 students are chosen to take part in this expense-paid, seven-day event in Washington D.C. The summit encourages young adults to become active and knowledgeable U.S. citizens by learning about The Constitution and Bill of Rights, the federal government, and the importance of being active in civic affairs.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Friday, 22 February 2008 |
NRA press release
Bush Administration to Propose New Rule Regarding Right-to-Carry in National Parks
Fairfax, Va. - At the request of the Bush Administration and 51 members of the United States Senate led by Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID), the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prohibition of firearms on agency land will be revised in the following weeks. The National Rifle Association (NRA) is leading the effort to amend the existing policy regarding the carrying and transportation of firearms in National Parks and wildlife refuges.
“Law-abiding citizens should not be prohibited from protecting themselves and their families while enjoying America’s National Parks and wildlife refuges,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA chief lobbyist. “Under this proposal, federal parks and wildlife refuges will mirror the state firearm laws for state parks. This is an important step in the right direction.”
|
|
Read more...
|
|
