Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gun-rights group fights proposal (Columbus Ohio ugly gun ban)
AP ^ | 6-20-05

Posted on 06/20/2005 7:20:48 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan

Gun-rights group fights proposal
Associated Press

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Gun-rights advocates say a proposed citywide ban on assault weapons is a "propaganda" tool to demonize all guns as part of a nationwide campaign.

That is not the case, said Melinda Swan, chief of staff for Columbus City Council, which will consider the ban next week.

Councilman Michael Mentel is introducing the ban at today's council meeting. A public hearing on the proposal will come Thursday.

"It's campaign propaganda," said David Buda, an attorney representing the People's Rights Organization, which opposes the ban.

City officials disagree with that characterization.

Mentel simply is "advocating what he believes public policy ought to be," said City Attorney Richard Pfeiffer Jr., whose office worked on the legislation.

Buda said national antigun groups are testing assault-weapons bans in a Democratically controlled city friendly to such proposals.

Although the ban is modeled on language from a national antigun group, Swan said the Legal Community Against Violence never approached the city, but she did seek the group's advice. The proposal would outlaw the sale or possession of semiautomatic rifles with pistol grips and detachable magazines - a standard Buda said is too broad.

"It is specifically designed this way to cover as many guns as possible," he said, because almost every rifle and shotgun has a part that gun manufacturers call a "pistol grip" even if it doesn't look like a military-style AK-47.

The city lost two federal court cases in the 1990s when the People's Rights Organization challenged previous attempts to ban guns.

The new proposal attempts to distinguish between legitimate sporting weapons and military-style assault weapons, said Assistant City Attorney Josh Cox. It defines assault weapons by characteristics instead of trying to ban specific models, he said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: awb; bang; banglist; columbus; guns; pro
Go PRO!!!! I met them at GRPC 2001. Good guys.
1 posted on 06/20/2005 7:20:49 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

The other thing about pistol grips is they can be manufactured from a broom handle and a screw, and installed in 30 seconds.

Try looking up the Robinson Arms Californicated version of the improved Stoner 63. They remove the pistol grip, leaving the stud to which the broomstick/screw can be attached.

The law is calculated to provide minimal inconvenience to criminals, and maximum chance to jail a law abiding citizen.


2 posted on 06/20/2005 7:30:18 PM PDT by Donald Meaker (You don't drive a car looking through the rear view mirror, but you do practic politics that way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

The whole idea that the gun is bad "because it's part of a nationwide campaign" is a bad argument to present; if the case can be made that it isn't, opponents have no leg to stand on, and the ban might be enacted. Instead, pro-rights advocates should take the position that there is no "sporting purpose" in the Right To Keep And Bear Arms, and specifically that trying to defend oneself from a criminal attack isn't a "sport," that banning guns based on specific cosmetic features is arbitrary, capricious, and wrong, and, very much incidentally, cannot be shown to have any tangible (that is, objectively measurable) benefits.


3 posted on 06/20/2005 7:33:17 PM PDT by coloradan (Hence, etc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

"The proposal would outlaw the sale or possession of semiautomatic rifles with pistol grips and detachable magazines - a standard Buda said is too broad."

This is insane. It would outlaw my 30-06, which is my favorite deer rifle. If I lived there, I would never give it up!


4 posted on 06/20/2005 7:46:50 PM PDT by Adiemus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan

Mentel?
Is he an American?
Didn't he take an oath to defend the Constitution?
In violating it, he is fraudulently naturalized and subject to deportation.
Goodbye, Mentel.


5 posted on 06/20/2005 8:01:58 PM PDT by henderson field
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
"The new proposal attempts to distinguish between legitimate sporting weapons and military-style assault weapons"

Have any of these idiots ever read the Bill of Rights and do they understand it? Jeez, this drives me nuts! I hope the people of Ohio stand up against this and boot these wanna-be-tyrants out of office.
6 posted on 06/21/2005 1:10:52 AM PDT by Radio_Silence
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson