Posted on 11/30/2001 5:12:46 AM PST by Deadeye Division
Hidden-weapon argument made
City, county lawyers defend Ohio's ban
By Dan Horn
The Cincinnati Enquirer
Opponents of Ohio's concealed weapons law told a judge Thursday that ordinary citizens have a right to carry guns anywhere they feel a threat to their security.
They asked the judge to overturn an Ohio law that forbids anyone but police from carrying concealed weapons.
Judge Robert Ruehlman heard the request Thursday in Hamilton County Common Pleas Court at the start of trial that could decide the concealed weapons law.
Four Cincinnatians challenged the law last year when they sued every municipality in Hamilton County, claiming police have no right to arrest law-abiding citizens for carrying concealed guns.
The four — a private detective, a hairdresser, a personal trainer and a pizza deliveryman — say they need guns for protection.
“The Constitution gives us the right to self-defense and to bear arms for our own security,” said Bill Gustavson, an attorney for the four. “Security is that feeling that when you walk out on the street you are protected.”
Attorneys for the county and city of Cincinnati told Judge Ruehlman that the right to bear arms does not bar the state from regulating how guns may be carried by citizens. They said Ohio has outlawed concealed weapons for more than 150 years because they pose a threat to police officers and others.
County and city attorneys argued that throwing out the law would allow people to carry a wide range of weapons, not just guns. One attorney even mentioned knives and box cutters, an apparent reference to the weapons used by terrorists to take over planes Sept. 11.
“Nobody challenges the right to bear arms,” said John Arnold, an attorney for Hamilton County. “The question is whether the state may prohibit carrying concealed weapons.”
Dozens of states have passed laws allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons, as long as they have no criminal convictions and are properly licensed.
Mr. Arnold said the case belongs in the state legislature, not the courts. He said the four Cincinnatians are trying to circumvent state lawmakers by asking the courts to throw out the concealed weapons law.
www.ofcc.net
Simple solution, carry openly.
That is probably even more so in Ohio.
11/30/01
Bill Sloat
Plain Dealer Reporter
Cincinnati
- Ohio's streets would be safer if law-abiding citizens packed side arms, a gun-rights expert testified yesterday during the opening of a court challenge of the state's 75-year-old law against concealed weapons.
David Mustard, an economics professor at the University of Georgia, said that crime rates have declined between 3 percent and 10 percent in the 33 states that now allow concealed weapons.
"The effect is to reduce violent crimes: rape, robbery, murder," Mustard said in Hamilton County Common Pleas Court.
In 1996, just nine states allowed citizens to carry concealed weapons, Mustard testified. Now, it's a majority.
Under Ohio law, only law-enforcement officials are allowed to carry concealed weapons. Some Ohio legislators have been pushing to repeal the ban, a move that is staunchly opposed by many police agencies across the state. The Cincinnati court case opens another front against the ban.
Judge Robert Ruehlman is hearing the civil lawsuit, which contends Ohio's concealed-weapons laws are unconstitutional, without a jury. Experts who disagree with Mustard's findings are due on the witness stand when the trial resumes next week.
State law makes it a felony to carry a concealed weapon. In Cincinnati, it has been vigorously enforced for years.
Chuck Klein, 59 and a Cincinnati private detective, is the lead plaintiff in the case. Klein said many Ohioans are already carrying guns.
"These aren't criminals," he said. "You've got waitresses, truck drivers, pizza delivery drivers, musicians, all carrying guns today to protect themselves."
Contact Bill Sloat at:
bsloat@plaind.com, 513-631-4125
Absolutely correct. It always fascinates me when conservatives who DEPLORE legislation from the bench, when achieved by liberals, turn around and try to do the exact same thing. People who do that don't actually have principles-- they just have objectives-- and they buy into the liberal argument that the end justifies the means. Hypocrites.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.