| Counterpoint |
|
|
|
| Written by Todd Coughlin | |
| Monday, 22 September 2008 | |
|
An article published in the Cleveland Plain Dealer "adequately" covered the recently decided Ohioans for Concealed Carry versus the City of Clyde. There were a few good points, but as expected our Chief Justices received a good portion of the press. Below are a few gems from the article and counterpoints or additional emphasis: The ruling not only eliminates gun bans in Independence and Cleveland Heights parks but also threatens several Cleveland gun restrictions and all but kills further efforts by cities to trump or challenge the 4-year-old state law. That is correct – it continues to prevent your local municipality from placing restrictions on the constitution – think of it as moving to Brunswick and losing your freedom of speech. Take out the inanimate object (firearm) and you have the same mentality – a city cannot prevent you from freedom of religion or speech. "The main impact is that it is going to restrict municipalities, city councils and so forth from restricting the rights of Ohio citizens who carry concealed weapons in public areas," said Patrick Lewis, a Cleveland attorney and member of the conservative Federalist Society, who was not involved in the case. This will also set a precedent for a local municipality from placing restrictions on things such as free speech, religion, UNREASONABLE search and seizure, willy nilly warrants, impartial juries, excessive fines, excessive bail, cruel and unusual punishment, prevention of you voting for your president, invoking slavery – you get the point. Chief Justice Thomas Moyer, who voted with the minority, was more direct, saying, "Implementation of the state statute strikes a severe blow to the underlying principles of self-government." No Chief Justice, what this means is that the constitution continues to be protected. If you want to incorporate a city called "Tommy Moyer’s Place" and all the homes must be painted purple with pink polka dots, knock yourself out. The court decided that it was, dismissing Clyde's argument that it was exercising "home rule" -- a state constitutional provision that allows municipalities to approve, in the interests of citizens, ordinances that conflict with state rules. A city has limited home rule, but cannot make a rule that overrules a state general law. The City of Clyde could be a proverbial tough guy, but the State of Ohio has a big brother and his name is "The Constitution of the United States." Moyer said an exception in the law allowing private-property owners to prohibit firearms on their premises but not allowing public owners to do the same proves the law is not fairly applied across Ohio. Again, it’s a good thing we have Justice Moyer on board – there’s a real bright one. Private property = citizen owned (non-public property) – City owned/State owned = My/Your taxes pay for those – why is it that my tax funded property should be posted? Private property owners have always had property rights that public entities do not have. Public officials don't own public property, the taxpayers do. All of them. Pfeifer also penned a dissent. "Is there any reason why the owner of this property, where families gather and children play, should be forced to allow people with guns to enter?" Pfeifer asked, bemoaning the fact that shopping mall owners can bar gun carriers from their stores, even though they're open to the public. Unfortunately I have to get started on this guy – allow me to remind you that he incorrectly stated that "only pedophiles are in the parks and they don’t carry guns". Shortly after his comment, a female above the age of 18 years old was abducted and shot – Hey Pauly, he was not a pedophile, just a common criminal and he did in fact have a gun – perhaps you should rethink your logic. You are lumping me, a gun owner who chooses to carry a firearm for personal protection, in with a criminal who would abduct somebody and violate them with this statement. How dare you? Who do you think you are, telling me that I am no better than a common criminal. Why should they be forced? Because the Citizens of Ohio own this property – not Justice Pauly. "The bottom line is that again, this is another attack on home rule," said Valarie McCall, chief of government affairs for the city of Cleveland. "We know what we need to do to keep people safe in Cleveland. As a local municipality, we should be able to say where you can't carry guns." Good Lord – the last person that can talk about running/managing a city is anybody in the City of Cleveland – Look who their last two mayors have been. Perhaps Val could post an officer on every street corner, that will make sense to keep me safe – wait, she can’t do that, she recently cut Police and Fire staffing. I know how to keep myself safe, and I don't need failed policies taking away that right. "People should be able to carry guns wherever they like, as long as they're registered and within the limits of the law," Mike Marx, 42, of North Royalton, said while eating lunch at Lakewood Park. "Parks, public places -- if someone feels the need, they should have one." Allow me to clarify for those who don’t understand how carrying a firearm works – firearms are not REGISTERED, when a firearm is purchased, the purchaser is ran through a background check – then when applying for a Concealed Handgun License, the training and application process vettes for felons or folks who are BY LAW prohibited from carrying a concealed handgun (not weapon, a CHL does not allow me to carry a “weapon” other than a pistol). However, I do agree with Marx's underlying sentiment that anyone who chooses to carry a firearm for personal protection has, and should have, the right to. Across the table, Lisa Herhuth, 28, had the opposite view. "I don't believe anyone should carry guns at all," the North Olmsted resident said. "I don't want to see them in public places or parks, either, especially where children are playing." Lisa – it is a CONCEALED HANDGUN – www.dictionary.com shows "concealed" to mean: To keep from being seen, found, observed, or discovered; hide. Cichowicz, 61, said that she would never carry a gun but that she can understand why some people may feel uneasy in any park. Orgill, 68, said authorities need to crack down on illegal possession of guns. Edna Orgill, you are right on – enforce the rules that are on the books already – crack down on illegal possession of guns Folks, don’t let the glitz and glamour of a firearm dazzle you in this ruling – it is more than that, this is about cities setting up a kingdom (think of Frank Jackson of Cleveland ruling a kingdom) and imposing their whims and rules on it’s subjects. This isn’t nutty stuff folks, if you are wondering how this country got into the mess that it is, look around, all of these little things add up to the Charlie Foxtrot that you see every day. |