| HB347 Opponent Hearing Update |
|
|
|
| Written by Daniel White | |
| Wednesday, 01 February 2006 | |
|
The opponent hearing for HB347 was held yesterday and offered up the same tired arguments from the gun grabbers that have already been proven to be untrue. The primary arguments against the bill were the provisions removing the media-access loophole and creating statewide pre-emption. A representative from The Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police stated that they are against nearly every provision, including removing the problematic "plain sight" provision for carry in a vehicle. (Click 'READ MORE' for an overview of the opponent testimony...) Judi Wolf, from the National Council of Jewish Women, testified against the bill. She opposed limiting news media access to the names of concealed carry permit holders. "As a parent, or as a citizen without children, we would like the right to know who has been given permission to carry a concealed weapon in our neighborhood and near proximities," she said. Rosie Craig from Shaker Heights said the legislation would effectively repeal her city's ordinances banning the commercial sale of guns and their assault weapons ban. "The Ohio General Assembly should not override our city's values and take our municipal gun laws away from us," Ms. Craig said. "We do not have a community full of people packing heat." Rep. Hood pointed out that enactment of assault weapon bans actually empowers criminals rather than deterring them. Toby Hoover, executive director of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence, accused the committee members at the hearing of not being partial; stating, "a good number of committee members" are co-sponsors of the legislation, [that] she hoped they would consider the arguments of opponents. Hoover said respect for law enforcement officers alone should halt any consideration of the bill's proposal to eliminate the "in plain sight" provision from existing law. "Most alarming in this bill is the preemption of local firearm laws as promised by the gun lobby," she said. "Preemption is contrary to the Home Rule laws of the state." Hoover reported that at least 20 municipalities currently have more than 80 firearm ordinances [allegedly] for public health and safety. Howard Friedman, a member of the coalition's board of directors, urged defeat of the bill as an "unjustifiable interference with the power of local governments to make rules suited to their own local needs." Friedman is a law professor at the University of Toledo. "House Bill 347 sets a bad precedent, thwarts the will of the citizens in many Ohio communities, and reduces the safety of many Ohio residents", he said. The Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police relayed its opposition to the bill in a letter to the committee from attorney John Gilchrist. They claim to be opposed to provisions that restrict journalist access to licensee records; create affirmative defenses for self-defense motor vehicle or boat; repeal the plain sight provision; repeal the prohibition of having ammunition ready at hand; and nullify municipal ordinances dealing with the sale and possession of firearms. "The association believes that instead of denying access to journalists, the legislature should make CCW licensee records open to the public," Gilchrist said. "Open records would allow citizens to review a gun incident and then determine if a licensee was involved. In this way, we can determine statistically if the CCW law has indeed made Ohio a safer place as proponents contend." (source: Gongwer) |