In the wake of a Round Table discussion of whether or not CHL-holders' records should be kept private, Dayton Daily News readers were just as overwhelmingly supportive of privacy in their letters to the editor as they were at the forum. But are news editors listening? More importantly, are legislators?

May 13, 2005
Dayton Daily News

Publishing names just a childish act

In following the debate on media access to conceal-carry records, it is hard to take the Dayton Daily News' position seriously, given the behavior of the Ohio media.

At this time, the only use of the media access rule I am aware of is for some papers to publish lists of all permit holders for an area. These actions are nothing more than childish tantrums of editors who are outraged that the Legislature gave more weight to the view of the peasants than they did to the enlightened pronouncements of editorial writers.

These were also blatant acts of intimidation, attempts to discourage people concerned for their privacy from applying for concealed carry handgun licenses.

If the DDN is so concerned about the access to these records, then why doesn't it use that access as it was intended?

In the past several months, there have been numerous articles in the DDN about shootings in the area. I do not recall the DDN mentioning the CHL status of any of the suspects named in these incidents.

I assume they don't possess licenses. If they did, I'm positive it would have been printed on the front page, using large headlines. Of course, highlighting the fact that CHL holders are not committing these crimes would undermine the ddn's stated editorial position.

Randy Allen
Moraine

State's list would be incomplete

Even if concealed-carry permit holders' names were made public, the list would be invalid. Ohio residents can obtain permits from other states, even if they never leave Ohio.

There are hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of permit holders living in Ohio whose names are not submitted here.

Thus, fighting for the list of permit holders is a exercise in futility. It is somewhat widely known, especially to law enforcement personnel, that some states only require a copy of an honorable discharge, a check and a copy of the applicant's fingerprints. The permit will come by mail, and show the issuing state on the top, followed by the applicant's name, address and city of residence in Ohio. Of course, this is 100 percent legal.

I, and others, are surprised about all the arguments and debates about revealing the names of the state's permit holders, since this information, if revealed, is almost useless, and most certainly incomplete.

David J. Leahy
Centerville

Interest in CCW law absurd

I find all the renewed interest in the concealed-carry law a bit absurd.

Of all the people who have completed the necessary requirements for obtaining this permit, how many have misused their right?

Furthermore, publishing the names of these people, who have done nothing wrong, seems, at best, a waste of time, and, at worst, harmful to the gun owner. Why should anyone looking to do a "home invasion" be given any more help? Knowing that a person has a gun, and watching his home, and keeping track of when he comes and goes, does the legal owner a disservice.

What have you, as a neighbor, learned? That a person who has completed classes and spent range time to both understand the law and his or her weapon, is allowed to carry it.

The guy who robs a convenience store or shoves a gun in your back when you're at an ATM is unlikely to have completed the necessary steps to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

The Dayton Daily News has a fair amount of trouble getting the obituary column accurate. I question its ability to be any more accurate in posting the names of people who have the legal right to carry a concealed weapon.

Dennis Gannon
Dayton

Why are people so afraid?

After reading the article, "Conceal-carry law sparks debate over information access," May 6, all I can ask is "Why?" Why are some people so afraid of conceal-carry? Why are they worried about something that, even if they had the information they seek, would make them no safer? Why do some people think they have the "right" to know everything? Stories like this stir up more debate.

Conceal-carry in Ohio became law, effective April 8, 2004. Although the current law has some flaws (the biggest one being giving anyone access to the records), I am certain they will be ironed out eventually. I assume those who want access to the records also opposed CCW in the first place.

I doubt this person ever served in the military, or is fully aware of the sacrifices our armed forces personnel face defending this great country of ours. And guess what? They use guns, rifles, tanks, jets and everything else in their arsenal to defend us from the bad guys. Do they want to know their names, too?

What we need are more good citizens to take up the call, get the proper training and apply for a conceal-carry license. If the bad guys don't know who is armed, maybe they will think twice before committing a crime.

Mike Newman
Kettering

Common sense lacking

Re "Fight rages on gun disclosure," May 1: In this article, a person is quoted as saying, "I think I have the right to know if my kids go in a car with somebody whether that person is carrying. I think I have a right to know if I hire somebody to come in and paint my house whether that person is carrying."

I guess it never occurred to her to simply ask the person.

If the person is carrying legally, he or she will probably respond truthfully. The person whom she has to worry about is the person who is carrying illegally and lies to her.

Common sense seems to be something that is lacking in those who don't approve of firearms.

Clyde Spencer
Fairborn

Related Stories:
AP/DDN CHL records roundtable: Another Perspective

OFCC participates in roundtable on concealed carry and privacy

The Wilmington News Journal is reporting.

From the story:

Gun-banning signs at the entrances to J.W. Denver Williams Jr. Memorial Park have been pulled. Similar signs posted at the entrances to the Clinton County Fairground are expected to soon come down, too.

align="right">
A formal, written opinion recently issued by Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro says signs cannot ban guns from city parkland. Rather, guns can be banned only within buildings in a city park, said Wilmington Director of Law Kathryn H. Hapner.

Likewise, Assistant Clinton County Prosecutor Rick Moyer talked Wednesday with a Clinton County Agricultural Society officer and advised that a person cannot carry a gun into a fairground building, but that the state's concealed-carry handgun law differentiates between public buildings and public grounds.

For the past year, OFCC TeamLeader Tim Inwood has worked diligently to educate these city officials. Initially, his efforts were met with frustration. Despite having told her exactly what Attorney General Petro's opinion now confirmed, Wilmington Law Director Kathryn Hapner told this newspaper last August that "I just think that we need to use some common sense. I mean, why would you want to take a loaded weapon into the Denver Williams park? I mean to me that just seems ridiculous."

Although it took far more effort than it should have to get these public officials to understand the law, we are please to see that Attorney General Petro’s reinforcement has been accepted as the final word. If only the City of Clyde were so prudent…

Click here for a list of businesses, as well and cities, counties and other political subdivisions of the state that have removed signs and stopped discriminating against Ohio CHL-holders.

Related Stories:
Petro finds ''no-guns'' signs on fairgrounds NOT valid

Wilmington Law Director: Maybe they'll sue Toledo instead of us

They don’t always make the headlines, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t still happening…

Case # 050395302
Title: Robbery
Location: 327 E Hudson St.
City: Columbus; Zone: 4
Precinct: 4; District: 43
Occurred: 5/11/2005 10:33:00 PM
Reported By: Officer Hogan, Badge 2177

Report Narrative:

REPORTING PERSON STATES THE SUSPECTS CAME IN TO THE LISTED UNITED DAIRY
FARMERS. SUSPECT #1 PULLED A BLACK REVOLVER AND ORDERED THE CLERK MILLARD
A SNIVLEY TO OPEN THE CASH REGISTERS. MR SNIVLEY OPENED ALL THREE
REGISTERS AND SUSPECT#1 TOOK THE CASH.SUSPECT#2 WENT BEHIND THE COUNTER
AND FILLED HIS POCKETS WITH CIGARETTES. SUSPECT#1 THEN TOOK $3 FROM [name redacted to protect the privacy of the crime victim] A CUSTOMER WHO WAS IN LINE. THE SUSPECTS THEN FLED AND RAN TO
THE REAR OF 2509 INDIANOLA AVE WHERE THEY GOT IN TO A CAR AND DROVE
OFF.THE SUSPECTS WERE OBSERVED GETTING IN TO THE CAR BY LATISHA L RECTOR
WHO COULD ONLY DESCRIBE THE CAR AS MID SIZE. ROBBERY SQUAD RESPONDED TO
THE SCENE AND TURNED IN TO THE PROPERTY ROOM A $20 BILL THAT WAS
RECOVERED FROM OUTSIDE THE STORE.

Related Stories:
Open letter United Dairy Farmers: John Osborne “not entitled to his own facts”

Two more ''no-guns'' UDFs suffer armed robberies

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

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

We’re not sure whether it’s a news story or an op-ed, but since Medina County Gazette reporter “Gladden” ends this story by expressing his personal opinion and referring to himself in the first person, we’ll take a gamble this was published as an editorial, even though it is not so delineated on the newspapers’ website. OFCC PAC Commentary provided in blue:

Remember all the hype when concealed-carry went into effect in April 2004?

Remember how opponents claimed it would make our streets more dangerous while proponents insisted it would make them safer?

To the extent such things are measurable, one year into the law that gives permit-holding Ohioans the right to carry hidden handguns in public, there is little appreciable impact on public safety — for better or for worse.

"I can't see where it's helped or caused a problem," said Medina County Sheriff Neil Hassinger.

The sheriff said he knows of no instance in which a permit-holder has used the privilege inappropriately or tried to carry a weapon where it's not allowed, such as school grounds or government buildings. Neither has there been any report of a crime deterred by a hidden handgun.

As newspaper after newspaper reports that they know of no crime having been deterred by a CHL-holder, there is a consistent pattern emerging. While they appear to be referring to information given to them from the county sheriff’s office about their own county, they don’t bother to point that out. Since there have indeed been documented incidents involving CHL-holders protecting themselves from attack this year, it is at least misleading, if not absolutely false, to say “Neither has there been any report of a crime deterred by a hidden handgun” without specifying the area the statement is referring to.

Some argue that's the whole idea: Criminals are less inclined to approach someone with the intent of robbing or attacking them if they think the potential victim may be armed. We'll never know how many deterred crimes there were because, well, they were deterred.

Advocates say crime has diminished in Ohio since the law went into effect. That may be factually correct, but U.S. Department of Justice figures show violent crime has been on the decline nationally since 1994, reaching the lowest level ever recorded in 2003. State sources report Ohio historically has enjoyed a lower crime rate than states of similar population.

Crime has been on the decline for a long time, for a lot of reasons. To credit one year of concealed-carry with a role in a decade-long trend may be an overstatement. Unfortunately, Hassinger said, because Medina County is one of the state's fastest-developing counties, crime rates here are likely to rise with the population, not fall.

The author doesn’t say who these “advocates” are who are pointing to crime reductions and claiming they prove OhioCCW is a success. They certainly never contacted OFCC before writing this story. If they had, we would have pointed out that FBI Uniform Crime Reports for the second half of 2004 (when CHL-holders finally were able to begin carrying) aren’t even out yet. Still, might the author also have mentioned that in direct correlation with those crime rate declines since 1994 has been a steady march of new concealed carry laws being passed in states across the nation?

Click on the “Read More…” link below for more.