| Supreme Court Denies Beatty v. Toledo Appeal |
|
|
|
| Written by Jeff Garvas | |
| Wednesday, 24 January 2007 | |
|
On Wednesday the Ohio Supreme Court denied an appeal in Beatty v. Toledo, in which Ohioans For Concealed Carry had joined efforts with Mr. Beatty to pursue an appeal of the Sixth District's absurd decision. Many regular readers of our website will recall that the Sixth District Court of Appeals concluded in Beatty that Ohio's concealed carry law is "not a general law" due to the fact that HB12 permits a private property owner to choose if their property is prohibited or not. The appellate court concluded that this was not a "uniform and consistent" statewide application of the law, and therefor argued that local governments could pass conflicting and more severe ordinances such as prohibition in a park. Without reason the Ohio Supreme Court rejected the appeal - quite possibly because there is no conflicting opinion from a different district. The silver lining to this cloud is that the Supreme Court acted before we could appeal the Ohioans For Concealed Carry v. Clyde case and attempt to join them in a combined appeal. Our appeal in that case sits in the Sixth District Court and could permit us to challenge that courts previous ruling. In the Beatty case much was rested on precedent set in Am. Financial Servs. Assn. v. Cleveland, which the Ohio Supreme Court overturned: Am. Financial Servs. Assn. v. Cleveland, 112 Ohio St.3d 170, 2006-Ohio-6043.. Ohioans For Concealed Carry will continue the fight to eliminate any notion of the idea that Ohio's Concealed carry law is anything less than a general law. Even if we do not prevail in reversing the Sixth District Court of Appeals we believe that Ohio House Bill 347 will serve as a safety net by prohibiting any local gun laws. Now is as good a time as any other to consider a contribution to Ohioans For Concealed Carry to help us pursue these efforts and protect your rights in the courts. |