Lawsuits bear fruit again as courts put hold on Cincinnati's bump stock ban
Less than two weeks after Franklin County Common Pleas Court ordered a permanent injunction against the City of Columbus, forbidding it from enforcing its ban against so-called "bump stocks," Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman granted a temporary injunction blocking Cincinnati's ill-advised ban on the devices.
From Cincinnati.com on Tuesday, July 24:
Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman granted a temporary injunction to two 2nd Amendment activist groups who opposed the ban.
A hearing about a possible permanent injunction will take place Oct. 22. If Ruehlman grants the permanent injunction, the ban will effectively be overturned.
The court actions come as a result of simultaneous lawsuits filed in June by Buckeye Firearms Association and Ohioans For Concealed Carry against the cities of Columbus and Cincinnati. The suits were filed in response to both cities' introduction of ordinances banning the possession, use, or acquisition of so-called "rate-of-fire firearms enhancers," commonly referred to as bump stocks or trigger cranks.
"This really isn't about bump stocks," said Dean Rieck, executive director of the association. "It's about the rule of law in Ohio. Cities can pass all kinds of laws, but they can't pass gun laws. We thought everyone understood that by now, but apparently not."
Attorney General Mike DeWine filed an amicus brief in the case against Cincinnati's bump stock banning stating that Ohio needs to have consistency in its laws across the state.
Two Cincinnati council members voted against the ordinance. Amy Murray agreed with the Second Amendment group saying the ordinance violates state law. Jeff Pastor told his colleagues they "voted to get the city sued while facing a $30 million deficit."
Both Ohioans for Concealed Carry and Buckeye Firearms Foundation have won lawsuits against cities that have attempted to regulate firearms.
In 2010, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in a 5-2 opinion that Ohio's "preemption" law is valid. In a case brought by the City of Cleveland against the State of Ohio, the court held that R.C. 9.68 is valid in all respects, including, but not limited to, the mandatory attorney fee provision against any city that attempts to violate a citizen's right to self-defense.
Attorneys for Columbus and Cincinnati rejected demand letters to file for an injunction to prevent the cities from enforcing the ordinances.
"It's unfortunate that we must sue cities to force them to obey state law," said Rieck. "But we simply cannot stand by and allow activist city councils to break the law and violate the rights of Ohio's 4 million gun owners."
Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Secretary and an NRA-certified firearms instructor. He is co-founder of BFA-PAC, and served as its Vice Chairman for 15 years. He is the editor of BuckeyeFirearms.org, which received the Outdoor Writers of Ohio 2013 Supporting Member Award for Best Website.
- 591 reads