| Ohio FOP Funds Solicitation & My Reply |
|
|
|
| Written by Jeff Garvas | |
| Thursday, 29 May 2003 | |
|
(originally posted by a reader as a news story to www.OFCCPAC.org) "I recently got the Ohio FOP's annual request for money. Here is my reply:" Click on the "Read More..." link below for more. Ohio State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police 222 E. Town Street Columbus OH 43215-4611 Gentlemen: I have received your annual solicitation of financial support. I am no longer a supporter of the FOP. I was once a "V. I. P. Booster." This ended several years ago, when the Ohio FOP came out as a non-supporter of legislation to allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms for our own lawful protection and defense, and that of our families. I use your annual solicitation as a reminder to send my contribution, instead of to the FOP, to Ohioans For Concealed Carry, Inc. I believe that by opposing concealed carry legislation such as House Bills 504, 274 (2002) and 12 (current General Assembly), and leading the Governor to do likewise, you are playing political games that endanger public safety. You are endangering my personal safety, and that of my family, by impairing our ability to be armed for lawful and appropriate self-defense. I find this unconscionable. I am very curious as to why the FOP opposes concealed carry licensing for Ohio. You have access to the same facts, same research findings and same statistics as anyone else who chooses to pay attention to them. Therefore you know, and I know you know, that: "Shall-issue" concealed carry licensing (i. e. the issuing official must issue the license to any applicant qualified by law) significantly reduces violent crime. (See More Guns, Less Crime by researcher Dr. John R. Lott, Jr.) Concealed carry licensing of private citizens is not a threat to the safety of law enforcement officers. Out of 3.5 million concealed carry licenses in 44 states, there is not ONE case of an officer being assaulted by a license-holder at a traffic stop. Concealed carry licensing does not increase the rate of firearms accidents. See Lott, cited above. Requirements for training as a condition of issuance of a concealed gun license have no statistically significant impact on the rates of firearms accidents involving licensees, whether the state has stringent requirements (e. g. Texas, Arizona), minimal requirements (e. g. Florida, Kentucky) or no training requirement at all (e. g. Indiana, Pennsylvania). I will only support the Ohio FOP when and if you vigorously support my right to bear arms for defense and security, including a concealed firearm. |