|
News
Tips
Interesting
Stuff
Weather.com
| |
News
Back
to front page
JUDGE’S
RULING ON OHIO CONCEALED GUN BAN PUT ON HOLD . . .
An Ohio appeals court is delaying a decision by Hamilton County Judge
Robert Ruehlman
who ruled Jan. 10 that Ohio’s 75-year-old law against the carrying of
concealed weapons violates the state’s constitution because it prevents
citizens from carrying firearms to protect themselves. In his ruling, Ruehlman
had ordered law enforcement officials in Hamilton County to stop arresting
citizens for carrying hidden firearms in their vehicles or on their persons. The
state appealed his order and the 1st Ohio District Court of Appeals
intervened putting a hold on Judge Ruehlman’s decision pending a full hearing
before the Appeals Court Jan. 22. Four individuals who said their jobs required
them to carry weapons for self-defense filed the lawsuit challenging the
concealed carry law a year and a half ago. Ohio’s Constitution protects an
individual’s right to bear arms, and the plaintiffs argued that the state law
prevented them from exercising that right.
Concealed Carry Opponents Exposed for Making
Inaccurate Statements
With a decision expected within the week on the Second Amendment Foundation's
(SAF) lawsuit to overturn the unconstitutional laws barring self-defense through
legal concealed carry of firearms, the other side is getting desperate as the
facts simply aren't on their side.
"As usual, opponents of self-defense have resorted to emotional rhetoric
and ignored the facts to further their selfish goals," stated Alan
Gottlieb. "Mr. Lowy in particular has distinguished himself in this area
and should know better as an attorney for the anti-gun Brady Center to Prevent
Handgun Violence.
Mr. Lowy was quoted in a Cleveland Plain Dealer article on December 26, 2001 as
making several deceptive statements. The biggest being that if the concealed
carry ban is overturned, "This would be the only state in the country with
no regulations."
The fact is that Vermont has allowed concealed carry without a license or other
prohibitive regulations since 1903. This is because of a Vermont Supreme Court
decision, State v. Rosenthal, 75 Vt. 295, 55 A. 610 (1903) which threw out a
city carry license law as a violation of the Vermont's Constitutional right to
keep and bear arms. If Ohio's law is similarly overturned, Ohio will become the
second state, not the "only" state.
A quick look at the website of the Brady Campaign, the sister organization to
the Brady Center to Prevent Handgun Violence, finds that Mr. Lowy should have
known this fact as the truth about Vermont is listed repeatedly and viewed
unfavorably on this site at www.bradycampaign.com using their own search engine.
There are 42 states with active concealed carry licensing systems, and if the
recently enacted New Mexico concealed carry law is upheld in that state's
Supreme Court, there would be 43 licensing states. Add Vermont, and there are
either a total 43 or 44 legal concealed carry states depending on the outcome in
New Mexico.
As for the remaining 6 or 7 states, only Ohio has the undefined affirmative
defense language with the burden of proof on the person prosecuted. In Nebraska,
the burden of proof is on the state to show criminal intent.
"The truth about the rest of the country needs to be heard, as must the
fact that Ohio is totally alone in how they force people to prove their
innocence with a carry law that even long-time veteran police officers cannot
understand," said Gottlieb, referring to Lt. Col. Richard Janke's testimony
at trial.
"It is the media's responsibility to accurately report the affect of the
pending decision," added Gottlieb. "This duty includes challenging
factual errors by either side and not repeating inaccurate information to the
public."
Last year, opponents of concealed carry also made the preposterous claim that
overturning these laws would arm criminals and children. Fortunately, the media
is not repeating this garbage as it has been proven that other state and federal
laws would remain in effect (see http://www.saf.org/Ohio.htm for details). In
addition, R.C. 2923.121 bars possession of firearms in liquor establishments and
R.C. 2923.122 bars weapons in school zones.
"The Second Amendment Foundation's lawsuit has been a sleeper story for
well over a year," said Dave LaCourse, SAF Public Affairs Director.
"It is time to wake up and understand that the role of the Judiciary is to
interpret laws and review their Constitutionality. If we prevail in our
challenge, people will begin reading the Ohio Constitution and begin learning in
detail the fundamental unfairness of the current carry scheme."
##
|
