April 29, 2004
Detroit Free Press

Intruder's killer: 'I had no choice'
Detroit woman tells of self-defense shooting

Their eyes locked.

Then Barbara Holland saw the barrel of the gun.

She lay on the floor in her house after an intruder had knocked her down while pushing through her side door. While on her back, she drew a 9mm handgun from a holster on her waist.

Her assailant's glare suddenly changed.

"He looked surprised," Holland said.

Then she pulled the trigger.

Holland, a 38-year-old Detroit business owner and mother, remembers firing three shots. Detroit police told her she fired six.

Either way, she killed the 42-year-old man, Clabe Hunt -- who had shoved into her home on Troester, near Hayes, on Detroit's east side at 8:10 p.m. April 13.

He was an ex-con with five children and was armed with a loaded, nickel-plated semi-automatic handgun that was not registered to him. Autopsy reports indicate he was shot in the head multiple times. He never fired his weapon.

Police officers said Holland's gun was licensed, and they determined the shooting to be self-defense. Wayne County prosecutors continue to investigate, which is routine in most fatal shootings.

Citizens defending themselves are precisely what backers of Michigan's controversial concealed-weapons law had in mind when they worked to pass the legislation in 2001. The law makes it easier for anyone without felony convictions or mental illnesses to obtain a permit to carry concealed weapons.

"The more the criminal element knows that Michigan residents can protect themselves and will protect themselves, the more crime goes down," said state Sen. Alan Cropsey, R-Dewitt.

Some opponents of the law predicted a large increase in self-defense-type shootings. Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who opposed the measure when she was state attorney general, has acknowledged that has not occurred.

Click on the "Read More..." link below for more.

April 30, 2004
Toledo Blade

Some weeks ago the Ford administration announced its intention to ban concealed-carry in parks, on TARTA buses, and other public places, claiming this ability under "home rule."

Not only does the state constitution specifically prohibit this, so does the newly passed concealed-carry law, a recent state Supreme Court ruling, Toledo Municipal Code, and the oaths of office of elected and appointed officials.

Article 18, Sections 3 and 7 are very clear on the abilities of municipal corporations to put further restrictions upon general laws of the state.

In the concealed-carry law itself, the General Assembly pre-empted cities from adding additional restrictions upon those licensed to carry concealed handguns.

The Ohio Supreme Court, in the case of Klein vs. Leis, held that the legislature has the authority to determine the method of carry of a firearm. This also means that the legislature has the ability to legalize concealed carry. Further, by finding that bearing arms for defense and security is a fundamental right, the court found that Toledo's ban on open carry is unconstitutional.

Toledo's own Municipal Code also prohibits the City from enacting this ban. Just look to section 549.21(b). Add to this the obligations of public officials to protect the rights of the people and obey the laws of the state under their oaths of office, and it is clear that City of Toledo officials have no ability to impose such a ban. This is nothing but an illegal usurpation of power.

This "you have to obey the law, but we are free to ignore it" attitude must not stand, and I would think the people, especially the media, would question why City officials seem to think they can assume the power of dictators.

Bruce A. Beatty
Luckey

Related Story:
Attorney General concurs: City and county gun banners preempted by state law