Get up-to-the-minute news on pro-gun law, politics, and events in Ohio PLUS the 38-page "Grassroots Action Guide" FREE!
Article Archive
LTE: Appeals court ruling sets bad precedent
Submitted by cbaus on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 23:15.September 26, 2006
Toledo Blade
Recently the 6th District Court of Appeals ruled in a 2-1 decision that the Ohio state law licensing qualified persons to carry a concealed firearm is not a "general law."
This potentially allows local governments to apply arbitrary restrictions to that state-issued license.
Judge Dennis Parish, who voted against the ruling, was quoted in The Blade as saying "If [the statute] is not a general law, then dozens if not hundreds of other state statutes are also not general laws," and "will serve only to promote uncertainty in the law."
Ohio lawmakers also passed the "Better Ohio Bicycle law," the intent of which is to standardize traffic rules and to restrict municipalities from making local laws to restrict bicycling.
What is to prevent communities from modifying the bicycle law based on the appellate court's ruling on the state concealed-carry law?
If that happens then the bicycle law which so many have looked forward to is rendered ineffective.
What is to prevent municipalities from applying the court ruling to other state licenses? Suppose a municipality wished to restrict persons under 18 or over 65 from driving within their borders.
Imagine driving into a community and being fined for violating such an ill-conceived law. Imagine the income a trap like that could generate for a municipality (at your expense, of course).
It seems to me that the 6th District ruling, if allowed to stand, sets a dangerous precedent which could allow for many areas of abuse.
It is also disturbing that the appellate court can have such an impact on a state statute ("if not hundreds of other state statutes") that was written, researched, debated, and voted into law by our state legislators.
James W. Fenn
Maumee
Op-ed: Gun Control: Does the UN Protect Women’s Rights?
Submitted by cbaus on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 23:10.September 27, 2006
By Howard Nemerov
In order to implement their policies globally, gun control activists promote the idea that more guns means increased victimization of women. This runs counter to established crime trends showing that women in countries instituting gun bans suffered increasing rates of rape while rape decreased in the U.S., where guns are available. But giving the benefit of the doubt, let’s see how women fared when United Nations peacekeeping forces controlled war zones throughout the world, and where, according to U.N. belief, civilian disarmament makes people safer.
Click here to read the entire article from Howard Nemerov, an accomplished writer and good friend to Buckeye Firearms Association.
NOTE: Nemerov appeared on NRANews.com's Cam & Company Wednesday September 27 at 11:20 p.m. Eastern to discuss this article! The archived broadcast will be available until 9:00 p.m. Thursday evening.
Pro-Gun Punditry: Wednesday's Buckeye State Roundabout
Submitted by cchumita on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 12:20.By Chris Chumita
There are more stories pertaining to our gun rights in Ohio then we can possibly draw attention to with individual daily commentary. But they are worthy of mention.
What follows is our review of headlines from around the state though a pro-gun rights lens.
From cops leaving burglars in the house to a candidate's forum in Suffield, these articles should be a part of your required reading!
Click on the "Read More..." link below for several days of headlines accompanied by short, concise pro-gun analysis.
Divert your tax money to pro-gun candidates!
Submitted by cbaus on Wed, 09/27/2006 - 08:06.Article compiled from previous commentaries by Ken Hanson and Jim Irvine.
How would you like to donate $100.00 of your Ohio's income tax money to a pro-gun candidate?
That's right, give $100.00 of your tax money to a pro-gun candidate's campaign. It is easy, it is legal, and Buckeye Firearms Association is about to make it even easier.
Ohio tax law gives individuals a tax credit of $50.00, and married couples a credit of $100.00 on their Ohio tax return for donations to candidates for statewide office. A credit is much different than a deduction. When you exercise this privilege, you don’t get a part of your donation back, you get the whole donation back as a tax refund.
If you do nothing, the bureaucrats will have no problem spending your tax dollars. But wouldn’t you rather take some of that money and divert it to a pro-gun candidate? You need to chose, because as an Ohio taxpayer you are going to spend the money one of those two ways, whether you like it or not.
Click on 'Read More' for complete details, and for links to some of the many campaigns deserving of your donation.
How does this work?










