Roger Caron, a CHL-holder who has unfortunate experience with what it is like to be in a "no-guns" victim zone where only the criminals have guns, has notified OFCC that United Dairy Farmers has begun issuing a letter that reveals the reasons why they believe banning CHL-holders from their stores is promoting safety.

From: consumerrelations@udfinc.com
Subject: Re: local robberies
To: "Roger Caron Jr."
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005

Thank you for your recent inquiry to the Concealed Weapons signs placed in the United Dairy Farmers stores. We appreciate the time you took to share your opinions with us. As you might expect, this has been an issues the we have received quite a large number of comments - both for and against.

United Dairy Farmers senior level management decided to place these signs in all our stores for primarily one reason - the safety of our employees and our customers. We feel the fewer weapons in our stores the less of a chance of a discharge (whether accidental or intentional). We understand that you may not agree with our decision but we hope you continue to shop in our stores. We sincerely regret the possibility of loosing you as a customer but the overriding factor is and always will be providing the safest environment for our employees and customers.

If we can be of further assistance, feel free to contact our office.

Thank you,
Pat Kelsch
Consumer Relations Representative
United Dairy Farmers
(800) 833-9911
(800) 833-1177

So now customers are told the company has a concern with accidental discharges, despite the fact that they have been doing business in Kentucky and Indiana for YEARS without any problems, and despite the fact that they have allowed CHL-holders in Ohio in their stores for the past year without incident.

Why does UDF think Ohioans who are licensed to carry firearms will be less responsible than Kentuckians or Hoosiers?

Contact information for Ohio-based United Dairy Farmers is as follows:

United Dairy Farmers
Robert Lindner Jr., President
3955 Montgomery Rd.
Cincinnati,Ohio 45212
www.udfinc.com

Phone: 1-800-833-9911
General Email: consumerrelations@udfinc.com

Email John Osborne, Director of Security: josborne@udfinc.com

Related Stories:
Last week: Five Ohio stores in ''no-guns'' UDF chain robbed!

UDF hears from customers, issues canned response, then letter from Security Dir.

UDF bans CHL - Tri-state customers told to stay out when armed

The Dayton Daily News is reporting that the Ohio 2nd District Court of Appeals on Friday denied Harris' appeal of a Miami County judge's order upholding Sheriff Charles Cox's denial of Harris' permit request last May, and as a result, a New Carlisle man will go to the state Supreme Court to challenge the Miami County sheriff's denial of his application for a concealed weapon license.
From the story:

William R. Harris, who has a top security clearance and has worked at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base for 35 years, has been trying to get a license for most of the first year of Ohio's concealed-carry law. The law that allows issuing of licenses to people 21 and older who pass a background check and complete a 12-hour safety course was effective April 8, 2004.
The challenge appeared to be the first to reach an appeals court in the region. Kim Norris of the Ohio Attorney General's Office said Tuesday she was researching to see if any other cases were on appeal across the state. She had not provided that information by late Friday afternoon.
Harris' lawyer, Jeff Slyman, said Friday that Harris will ask the Ohio Supreme Court to consider an appeal.
"He respectfully disagrees with the court's decision. ... He wants to pursue it because he feels very strongly in the position he's taken," Slyman said.

According to the story, Judge Cox denied the application after a background check showed Harris was the subject of a five-year civil protection order issued in a Greene County court in December 2000. But the order against Harris was dismissed in late 2000 in favor of a consent decree that did not specifically prohibit Harris from possessing a weapon. Despite this, Miami County Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey Welbaum last summer ruled that Harris remains subject to the Greene County civil protection order.
The DDN reports the appeals court judges said Welbaum did not abuse his discretion in reviewing evidence and deciding the consent agreement signed by Harris legally was a civil protection order.
According to the newspaper, Miami County Prosecutor Gary Nasal was unavailable for comment.

Dayton’s WHIOTV.com is reporting that a debate in Ohio and elsewhere is raging over the rights of convicted sex offenders.

From the story:

Florida authorities said they were misled by acquaintances of the man charged with kidnapping and killing 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford of Homosassa, Fla. Police said the acquaintances told them the convicted sex offender wasn't living in a trailer when he actually was.
Authorities across the country say their current options for tracking convicted sex offenders are not adequate. But civil libertarians say that authorities can violate the offenders' rights with excessive requirements.

In Ohio, a prison reform advocacy group filed suit this week to challenge a new provision of state law that will allow prosecutors later this month to go to court to evict convicted sex offenders who live within 1,000 feet of a school.

Commentary from OFCC PAC Senate District 10 Coordinator Larry S. Moore:
We are concerned about the rights of prisoners, the rights of the terrorists being held, the rights of sexual offenders, and the rights of illegal immigrants. Gov. Taft even guards the rights of prisoners and former prisoners. Meanwhile the right to privacy for the law-abiding citizen who happen to have a CHL means nothing...

Related Stories:
Sex offender worries grandmother

Taft veto-threat kills first attempt to close Media Access Loophole

Dayton: Woman Shot in Neck Tries to Drive to Hospital

A mother crashes her car after being shot in the neck, and police say her children know who pulled the trigger. Police say Shawntae Henderson was shot in the street near Conners and Germantown. Police believe the victim was trying to drive herself the hospital when the accident happened. The victim slammed into a parked truck, and then into another car. Charles McCullough had just finished cutting the grass when the crash occurred. He says the wounded woman got out of the car and walked around with a bullet lodged in her neck. McCullough said, "She just kept saying, why am I still walking? Why am I not laying dead? I just been shot. I can't understand why I'm still standing." The victim's two children were in the car. They suffered minor injuries. Police believe the kid's father pulled the trigger.

Dayton: Husband indicted in wife's death

Cynthia Jennings-Wade of Kettering was stabbed or cut 30 times by a samurai sword, Montgomery County Prosecutor Mathias H. Heck Jr. disclosed Monday while announcing the indictment of her husband on a charge of murder. Jennings-Wade, 38, died March 25 at the couple's home at 100 Devonhurst, Apt. B. Ronald J. Wade Jr., 49, is charged with murder and is being held in the Montgomery County Jail in lieu of $500,000 bail. If convicted of murder, Wade faces a mandatory prison sentence of 15 years to life in prison. Prosecutors must show he intended to kill his wife. "Every internal organ but two of Cynthia Jennings-Wade received a stab wound or was perforated by this defendant," Heck said, describing it as a "terrible, terrible murder." The sword, 37 inches in length, had been kept at the home, but Heck said prosecutors have not yet learned from Kettering investigators how long Wade had owned the sword.

At the conclusion of this story is a curious comment made by the prosecutor, Mathias Heck. According to the DDN, Heck says couples who are in strained or deteriorating relationships should consider any weapons such as guns or swords and "just get rid of them" while they sort out their emotional issues "just for the sake of the people involved."
Domestic violence presents one of the most complicated challenges to a person concerned with self-defense, because the person in need if protection is often living with the person they are fearful of. Whatever the answer to this problem is, it is painfully clear from these two stories that the answer is NOT to voluntarily render oneself defenseless when involved in an abusive relationship.