indexing
Posted on 04/19/2002 6:05:29 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
On April 10 an Ohio appellate court unanimously ruled that Ohio's ban on carrying concealed weapons, in effect since 1974, violated the people's right to keep and bear arms. The appellate court also upheld a lower court's dismissal of the prosecution of a pizza deliveryman who carried a handgun in his waistband for protection while making his deliveries. Since 1851, the Ohio Constitution has said, "the people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security." In striking down the ban, the court noted that the framers of the Ohio constitution "put the citizens' rights up front. We believe they meant what they said." This ruling is a victory for the citizens of Ohio.
Prior to the decision, Ohio was one of six states that have nearly complete bans on the carrying of concealed weapons for self-defense. Thirty-two states, including every state bordering Ohio, have concealed weapon licensing statutes that require the issuance of a carry permit to citizens who undergo a background check and meet certain objective criteria, including, generally, that they be at least 21, have no felony conviction, and have completed a gun safety course.
Nearly all of those states have enacted the "shall issue" licensing systems since 1987. The horrors predicted by critics - that such laws would transform our cities into "Dodge Cities," where blood would run in the streets as citizens took to settling disputes with gunfire - have not materialized. Apparently, this portrait of the ordinary citizen as one insufficiently restrained by moral and legal injunctions against murder, having murderous impulses that he would promptly act upon if only a gun were handy, is false.
Moreover, research by Yale University economist John Lott, and publicized in his book, More Guns, Less Crime, shows that states that have enacted concealed-carry laws have experienced a notable decrease in violent crimes against persons.
Eleven states, including California and New York, still have the older, discretionary licensing statutes. They permit the chief of police or a local judge to issue carry permits to persons of "good character" and who have some "good reason" or "proper cause" to carry a gun. The language of these statutes is so vague that issuance of carry permits is completely discretionary, and generally these statutes are administered as near-total bans, especially in cities and suburbs.
In New York City, for example, the people who seem most often to have both "good moral character" and "proper cause" to carry, besides those whose work requires them to carry, are celebrities, such as Howard Stern, or persons who have wealth, political influence or connections. Meanwhile, cab drivers-who are murdered or shot more frequently than police officers and far more frequently than celebrities-fail time and again to have "proper cause."
In this manner, discretionary licensing schemes reveal an ugly fact: the state that operates on the basis of such a law clearly believes that only certain of its citizens are important enough to warrant the right of self-protection; the rest can just take their chances.
Only one state, Vermont, has neither a ban nor a licensing system. Vermont's law prohibits carrying with intent to commit a crime, but does not prohibit carrying for self-defense. Since even "shall issue" licensing systems constitute a prior restraint upon our right, Vermont is the only state that respects the right to bear arms.
If you believe that it is laws that keep you safe, then you should steer clear of Vermont, because in this regard it is "lawless." Evidently, however, the tourists who flock there year after year do not perceive the great danger they face because of an absence of words in the Vermont statute books. Apparently they are sufficiently assured of their safety solely on the basis of the trustworthy character of the Vermonters that they meet.
For many years, Ohio's gun owners have unsuccessfully lobbied their representatives to repeal the concealed-carry ban and pass a "shall issue" licensing system. If Ohio state officials appeal the appellate ruling to the Ohio Supreme Court and that court strikes down the ban on carrying concealed weapons, Ohio would join Vermont as one of two states that respects the right of the people to carry weapons for their defense.
Paradoxically, the Ohio Court of Appeals decision may, therefore, finally drive the Ohio governor and legislature to enact a "shall issue" licensing scheme. It may be the only way left to address the terrible fear that Ohioans may begin exercising their rights without benefit of state supervision or approval. Heavens!
Jeff Snyder is the author of the Cato Institute study, "Fighting Back: Crime, Self-Defense and the Right to Carry a Handgun," and the new book, "Nation of Cowards - Essays on the Ethics of Gun Control" (Accurate Press).
indexing
Note to IL residents, "People have the government they deserve."
Privilege - A particular and peculiar benefit or advantage enjoyed by a person, company, or class, beyond the common advantages of other citizens.Black's 6th P1197
License- A Permit, granted by an appropriate governmental body, generally for a consideration, to a person, firm, or corporation to pursue some occupation or to carry on some business subject to regulation under the police power. Black's 6th, P-920
So long as Americans can be convinced that they need to apply for a privilege to exercise a right they can expect to be denied their rights.
Boonie Rat
MACV SOCOM, PhuBai/Hue '65-'66
§ 4. Bear arms; armies. The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.
Is anyone in Kansas willing to do the same thing or are they waiting to see what the results of Ohio are?
This would be awesome. For years, many have tried so hard, to get some kind, of conceal carry passed. Not having to jump through loops to be able to exercise a right, is the way it should be.
Hopefully, this will set a presidence, for more States.
People can argue any way they want about guns, pro or con. If some people wish to be victims, then that is their right, but they have no right to demand that all of us dictate that our lives are subject to the whims of criminals. And anyone who will not act in their own self-defense, yet expects others to come to their aid simply because it is "their job", hold a point of view that is, at best, morally bankrupt.
I urge everyone here to read Jeff's Snyder's excellent book "Nation of Cowards". This collection of essays goes far deeper than the mere "right to own guns", and cuts to the ethical quick of the ideas and philosophies that underly all of our inalienable rights. Once you have read this book, you will never view the "gun debate" or the "gun grabbers" in the same way ever again, nor for that matter, the actions of our government in it's utilitarian desire to strip us of our rights and liberties.
You want the heaviest caliber ammunition you can carry for the "gun control debate"? Here it is.
Click on the graphic or CLICK HERE to purchase this excellent treatise on the moral obligations and responsibilities that are part and parcel of being a free people. The price is only $15 a copy and the book is a very quick and worthwhile read. It also makes for a great birthday or Christmas gift. Please note that I have no affiliation with the publisher or author of this book. My only motivation here is to inform and empower those of us who still know, honor, cherish and seek to protect our human freedoms and dignity. Tell them FreeRepublic.com sent you!
For a sample, I have the main essay from which the book is titled on my website in PDF format HERE .
Shooter 2.5...he is talking about Senator Mike DeWine, from Ohio. A RINO in the worst way, concerning 2nd Amendment issues, (also just voted against exploration in the ANWR.)
Where does DeWhine stand on this one?
I really have not heard much about his opinion, on this State issue. With his record, I cannot imagine him being for it.
One can only hope that all politicians everywhere live with this fear.
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.
