|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Sunday, 18 May 2008 |
Despite the claims of the anti-gun lobby that it would make Georgia "less safe", Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue signed House Bill 89 into law Wednesday.
Among the rights restored by the bill:
- CCW holders will be able to carry their firearms into restaruants serving alcohol, provided they do not drink
- Removes the ban on CCW in parks
- Removes the ban on CCW on public transportation
- Relaxes car carry restrictions and nullifies "parking lot bans"
- Shortens the timeframe for license issuance by probate judges
The removal of the ability of corporate businesses to enact parking lot bans drew some of the harshest debates during consideration as it pitted the rights of gun owners against the rights of property owners. In the end, the personal property rights of gun owners over their vehicles and their right to not be disarmed between home and the parking lot won out.
The bill is scheduled to become law on July 1, 2008, but legal action to block it is being threatened. |
|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Sunday, 18 May 2008 |
As another presidential election approaches, we are once again forced to choose between the lesser of several evils.
The two current Democrat front runners, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, have proven themselves to be enemies of the Second Amendment, despite recent claims to the contrary.
On the other side, you have John McCain, who while no great friend to gun rights (he has pushed for background checks to close the non-existent "gun show loophole" and has supported legislation that restricts the rights of groups like the NRA to conduct political campaigns).
Of course, it was McCain who attended the NRA's national convention in an attempt to reach out to gun owners and garner their support for his election campaign.
“It seems every election, politicians who support restrictions on the Second Amendment dress up in camouflage and pose with guns to demonstrate they care about hunters,” Mr. McCain said, “even though few gun owners fall for such obvious political theater.” |
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Sunday, 18 May 2008 |
Yet another incident reminds us of the foolhardiness of simply having a "feeling" of security.
At 8:00 Thursday morning, a 25-year old woman was attacked and beaten in the parking lot of a Walgreens drugstore. The attacker attempted to steal her purse, and when she resisted began punching her in the face. Witnesses intervened and began chasing the suspect, but he was able to elude his pursuers and make off with her cell phone.
I applaud this woman for having the courage to fight back. Fortunately, her attacker did not pull a weapon and she was able to foil the robbery for the most part.
However, there are still several lessons to be taken from this brazen attack. |
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Jeff Knox
|
|
Saturday, 17 May 2008 |
The Knox Report
From the Firearms Coalition
By Jeff Knox
(May 13, 2008) Everyone knows that you can’t legally purchase a handgun from a dealer in another state, and most folks know that it is a crime to purchase a gun on behalf of someone else or to sell a gun to someone knowing that it is intended for someone else, but there are other deals that many people seem to be confused about.
Ask ten gunowners what the rules are regarding sales by private individuals to other private individuals and you are likely to get at least 12 different answers. There are also questions about transporting weapons, and of course about carrying concealed or open, carrying in cars, and carrying guns in the woods.
Some of the questions can be easily answered while others can get complicated. Here are a few items I have run across recently that are in need of illumination. In all of these cases I am talking about regular folks and regular guns, not FFL holders or C&R items:
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Sunday, 11 May 2008 |
While the Ohio State Supreme Court debates whether your self-defense rights are at the whim of local politicians pandering for liberal votes, another victim has fallen prey to the criminal element.
A 52 year old woman was attacked while walking her dog in West Creek Reserve park in Parma. She had been beaten with a rock and her car, purse, wallet and cell phone were missing. She was taken to MetroHealth Medical Center and reportedly in very serious condition. Police were able to locate her stolen vehicle and have a suspect in custody.
With the weather warming up, people are taking to the parks in greater numbers to enjoy the fresh air and exercise. Unfortunately, the criminals are also stepping up their visits to take advantage of an increased number of potential victims.
Putting up signs banning weapons only serves to disarm those inclined to follow the law in the first place. We urge the OSC to keep this in mind as they deliberate the Clyde case and decide whether local municipalities can take render a Concealed Handgun License invalid wherever they choose. |
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Jeff Knox
|
|
Wednesday, 07 May 2008 |
The Knox Report
From the Firearms Coalition
By Jeff Knox
(May 6, 2008) When Steven Barber turned in his midterm creative writing assignment at the University of Virginia’s College at Wise (UVA-Wise), he was hoping for a good grade to complement his 3.9 grade point average. Instead, Barber was expelled from school, locked in a mental institution for three days, and had his concealed carry permit revoked.
Barber’s fictional story was a first person narrative of a troubled college student consumed by depression, paranoia, drug addiction, and alcoholism as he struggles with one of tragedy’s recurrent themes, “To be or not to be.” The character progresses through fear, anger, and despair; sleeping with a gun under his pillow after the Virginia Tech massacre, contemplating the murder of an unpleasant professor, and finally deciding on suicide. The entire story is just contemplation – no characters, real or fictional were harmed in the telling of the story – and Barber himself is nothing like the character he described.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Wednesday, 07 May 2008 |
Unfortunately, it often takes the most heinous of crimes to remind us just how untrue the anti-gun rhetoric is.
As many of you know, right now OFCC is embroiled in a case before the Ohio Supreme Court, fighting against the City of Clyde (and all anti-gun municipalities) who passed an ordinance banning firearms in their public parks (in violation of statewide preemption).
The anti-gun crowd will have you believe that you don't need your gun in a park and that banning guns make people feel safe. Of course, feeling safe and being safe are actually two different things entirely.
Today, the newscasts are rife with stories about the woman who was abducted from the Lorain County Metro Parks’ Carlisle Reservation, shot in the back, and raped. |
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Wednesday, 07 May 2008 |
The Virginia Citizens Defense League has issued a call for action in the efforts to overturn the ban on firearms in National Parks. OFCC was one of the signatories of the VCDL petition to overturn the ban, and we support their efforts.
*************************************
As you know, the Department of the Interior (DOI) has finally
published a proposed change to the National Park and National Wildlife
Refuge rules.
The question is -- Does this DOI change fairly address either the
concerns expressed in a letter signed by 51 Senators or VCDL's
Petition for Rule Making (PRM)?
-- The letter signed by the 51 Senators states that they support "an
exception...to allow law-abiding citizens to transport and carry
firearms consistent with state law where the National Park Service's
sites and the National Wildlife Refuges are located."
-- The Petition for Rule Making (PRM) submitted by VCDL requested
DOI regulations be modified to "permit citizens to carry operational
handguns for personal protection in National Parks, consistent with
the laws of the state in which the park is located".
Does DOI's proposed change do either of the above? NO!
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Gary Witt
|
|
Thursday, 01 May 2008 |
On May 1st, the House Criminal Justice Committee of eight Republicans and seven Democrats accepted Substitute House Bill (HB) 264. There was no discussion and no objection from any of the committee members prior to its acceptance. The bill’s language is now identical (except for one technical issue characterized by one legislator as "insignificant") to the language of Substitute Senate Bill (SB) 184. Substitute SB 184 passed the full Senate unanimously on April 16, 2008.
Under the proposed legislation, an individual (or his legal representative) who was in the process of committing one or more of the violent crimes listed in the bill would not be able to bring a civil lawsuit against an individual who used deadly force to prevent death or serious bodily harm to himself or others. If the deadly force was used in ones home or vehicle, there is a presumption of self defense and the burden of proof otherwise is on the prosecutor. If the deadly force was used anywhere else the burden of proof is on the person who used deadly force to prove it was necessary.
OFCC member Gary Witt attended the House committee meeting on behalf of OFCC. He was told by legislators that the House and Senate leadership will determine which bill moves forward. "It would seem", Witt said, "that having identical language in both bills will make the process easier."
Committee schedules and their agendas are normally posted on Friday afternoons for the following week. Please visit this link for the Criminal Justice Committee. Full text of the Substitute SB 184 can be found here. Substitute HB 264 is not available online as of this writing. |
|
Written by Daniel White
|
|
Tuesday, 22 April 2008 |
The Wall Street Journal is not often a publication one would turn to for pro-gun reporting, but a recent opinion peace published entitled Trigger Happy worked to dispel several gun myths pertaining to the character and happiness levels of those who choose to take responsibility for their own personal protection.
Responding to a Barack Obama quote, "They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or antitrade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations", this piece pointed out that, in fact, gun owners from both of the major political parties reported higher levels of happiness than those who didn't own firearms.
In 2006, 36% of gun owners said they were "very happy," while 9% were "not too happy." Meanwhile, only 30% of people without guns were very happy, and 16% were not too happy.
In 1996, gun owners spent about 15% less of their time than nonowners feeling "outraged at something somebody had done." It's easy enough in certain precincts to caricature armed Americans as an angry and miserable fringe group. But it just isn't true. The data say that the people in the approximately 40 million American households with guns are generally happier than those people in households that don't have guns. |
|
Read more...
|
|
