Ohioans for Concealed Carry Fights Pre-emption Violation

[flyingjunkie]

Seems that a small town in Ohio is being called out for a pre-emption violation. The sad thing is that, regardless of how the city council feels, the law is the law and they are in violation of it. But now they are going to spend taxpayer money to fight for their law that has already once been defeated in Cleveland. Good Luck to OFCC!

The small town of Oberlin, Ohio is preparing for a big fight over a change in its law that would permit people to carry weapons in local parks, in accordance with a state statute.

The change will have to be made over the opposition of many residents and the City Council.

"I'm not in favor of any of this,'' Council President Ron Rimbert told the Plain Dealer. "No one on Council is. But we need to get this passed. We have a responsibility to our citizens that we don't get caught up in any litigation. In Oberlin, we're protective of our family and friends. But this is a state law.''

An Ohio law passed in 2006 permits people to carry guns in most public places, including public parks. Oberlin's ordinance prohibiting the carrying of guns in parks has been on the books since 1998. No one seems to have noticed the discrepancy until Brian Kuzawa, from neighboring Ashland County, contacted the town's police chief on August 2.

Kuzawa told Oberlin Police Chief Tom Miller in an email that he and his wife would be bringing their two-year-old to an Oberlin park the next day, and both he and his wife would be carrying guns. Miller called Kuzawa after receiving his email and admitted that the state law trumped the city's ordinance.

Oberlin's City Council is expected to decide on September 16 whether to rescind the local law, or challenge the state law in court. Precedent is not on their side if they choose the latter option; Cleveland lost a similar gun-rights battle in 2010.

That hasn't stopped members of the City Council in Oberlin, a town renowned for its liberalism that is the home of Oberlin College, from making their displeasure known.

"Oberlin does not want people bringing guns into its parks,'' Councilmember Shannon Fairchild-Soucy told the Plain Dealer.

Doug Deeken, of the group Ohioans for Concealed Carry, took a different view of the controversy.

"We don't want law-abiding citizens getting arrested in Oberlin for an unenforceable law," he told the paper. "That's the crux of the matter."

Read more at Fox News

[RusskyDudesky]

Seems that a small town in Ohio is being called out for a pre-emption violation. The sad thing is that, regardless of how the city council feels, the law is the law and they are in violation of it. But now they are going to spend taxpayer money to fight for their law that has already once been defeated in Cleveland. Good Luck to OFCC!

Oberlin is a liberal shithole like Berkley, CA full of hoplophobes and militant homosexuals.

My ex wife's younger brother went to college there at Oberlin and came back a typical flaming liberal Obama ass kisser that I wanted to slam his head into a brick wall. Ohio may have its fair share of conservative towns, but Oberlin sure aint one of them.

[flyingjunkie]

The story on Fox News was pretty ridiculous, but the expanded original article is down-right outrageous. See below, bold and colored comments by me:

OBERLIN, Ohio — Oberlin, a bastion of liberalism, is bracing itself to deal with a state gun law that many residents and officials oppose.

City Council is reluctantly mulling a change to its law that prevents firearms in city parks, as it conflicts with an Ohio statute that permits guns in most public places, including parks. If City Council does not rescind the measure, gun owners can take the city to court. Cleveland lost a similar fight over a guns-rights issue in 2010.

"I'm not in favor of any of this,'' said Council President Ron Rimbert. "No one on Council is. But we need to get this passed. We have a responsibility to our citizens that we don't get caught up in any litigation. In Oberlin, we're protective of our family and friends. But this is a state law.''

The move comes weeks after an Ashland County man notified city police that the state law supersedes the city's. Brian Kuzawa told Tom Miller, the city's police chief, in an email Aug. 2 that he and his family would be attending a city park the next day.

He said he and his wife would be carrying guns, and they did not want to be "accosted by'' Oberlin police. He said Miller called back a few hours after the initial email and said it is legal to carry weapons in the city's parks.

To show support for the state law and to educate others, Kuzawa said, guns-rights advocates went to the Park Street Park about 11 a.m. today to picnic and spend time with their families. About 36 people attended. Some carried firearms in the park where Kuzawa went with his family last month.

Kuzawa said he and his family had gone there simply to enjoy the day and "let my 2-year-old run off some energy.'' He said he is not a member of the NRA or Ohioans for Concealed Carry, which successfully sued the city of Clyde over the law.

Oberlin Council revisited the local ordinance, passed in 1998, and sought solutions. Council is expected to decide Sept. 16. It has few options: It can rescind the local law so that the city follows the state's, which went into effect in 2006, or it can prepare for a legal fight.

Kuzawa said he is troubled by the reaction of residents and City Council. He said he went to a meeting earlier this week and spoke with a woman who discussed the issue calmly.

That's until she noticed his empty gun holster, and her demeanor instantly changed, he said.

"If looks could kill, you would be reading a story about a cremation right now,'' Kuzawa said.
And yet, we're the dangerous one. The guy didn't even have his gun in his holster and she flipped!

Doug Deeken, an executive with Ohioans for Concealed Carry, said the issue is simple: "We don't want law-abiding citizens getting arrested in Oberlin for an unenforceable law. That's the crux of the matter.''

But Sharon Fairchild-Soucy, a member of Council, said her colleagues are opposed to the state dictating what the city can and cannot do, especially when it comes to guns. Read without liberal glasses on, that statement reads "We want to control every aspect of your life that we can and make you completely rely on us. NO RIGHTS FOR YOU UNLESS WE SAY SO!!!!"

"Oberlin does not want people bringing guns into its parks,'' she said.

Eric Norenberg, the city manager, agreed: "One of the biggest frustrations is that our council must act on this when there is clear, local sentiment against it.''

City officials have learned that others fought similar battles -- and lost.

In 2007, Cleveland sued Ohio, claiming that the state law involving guns was unconstitutional because it infringed on Cleveland's home-rule authority, or its ability to adopt and enforce its local laws. Three years later, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled against the city, saying the law was constitutional.

In its decision, the state high court said that law brought uniformity to gun statutes across the state and without it "law-abiding gun owners would face a confusing patchwork of licensing requirements, possession restrictions and criminal penalties as they travel from one jurisdiction to another.''

But Oberlin residents still question the law.

Rimbert, the Council president, said he has been an umpire for more than 30 years, and he brought up those experiences when dealing with the issue of guns in parks.

"It could become an uncomfortable situation for an umpire or any official for that matter to look over and see a person with a sidearm in the stands,'' he said. "And you know some parents. Tempers start to flare and who knows what could happen.'' What kind of lunatic game are these people playing? I understand that things with little leagues get heated, but really!?

Deeken, of Ohioans for Concealed Carry, said an umpire would handle it like any other situation: "You call the police and let them deal with it. We're not trying to be police officers. We're just carrying firearms to protect ourselves and loved ones.'' Exactly!

David Noice, a guns-rights advocate from central Ohio, emailed Oberlin officials Aug. 2, the same day Kuzawa sent his notice to the police department. Noice was blunt: "Your city ordinance restricts the possession of firearms in city parks. This is no longer permitted by state law.''

He said the city is not alone in violating that law.

"There are numerous public entities that aren't compliant with state law,'' Noice said in an interview. "A lot of them simply don't realize it and are happy when we point it out to them. They move immediately to correct it. Oberlin looks like it will resolve this. But it is complaining every step of the way. It's fine that it has dissenting views, as long as it fixes the problem.''

Fairchild-Soucy said she believes she and her colleagues on Oberlin's council will fix the problem. She expects City Council to rescind the city's law, a move that would put the city in line with state law.

And she expects City Council to follow that with a vote of protest immediately afterward.

Also, be sure to check out the page and blow up the poll on there about towns being able to ignore state laws ie pre-emption violations.

[RusskyDudesky]

Oberlin is to Ohio as to what NYC is to New York State. They want to trump state law and put themselves on a fricken pedestal as if they are holier than thou because we all know that liberals are so tolerant and know what's best for everyone else. (NOTE: EXTREME SARCASM)

[BobFromBucks]

Berkeley may be left of Oberlin geographically but Oberlin and many of its grads make Berkeky look like, well, Columbus.

Having been born and raised out that way and with at least a couple of dozen aquaintences who graduated from Oberlin, I find three things they (the ones I know) all have in common. They are astonishingly liberal, extremely bright, and come from wealthy families. Obviously, not all Oberlin alums fit that description, but read the wiki on their famous grads. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...College_alumni

So, what does this mean to gun owners and why should you care? It means they will have all the funding needed to fight this and they are a very influential lot. If you wanted to pick an Ohio community to fight a preemption battle, the absolute last place in Ohio you'd choose is Oberlin.

Erie, PA was probably the absolute worst choice to fight a preemption battle for a city in PA in my opinion knowing Erie's predilection for ethnocentrism combined with a deep distruste of anyone not at least 4th generation Erie but Oberlin trumps even that debacle.

This business (not planning and not picking your battles) is going to get out of control and all gun owners will pay the price of half-cocked actions.

Somehow, Michelle Malkin, also attended Oberlin. It must have been a very interesting time for her.

[JenniferG]

Erie, PA was probably the absolute worst choice to fight a preemption battle for a city in PA in my opinion knowing Erie's predilection for ethnocentrism combined with a deep distruste of anyone not at least 4th generation Erie but Oberlin trumps even that debacle.

This business (not planning and not picking your battles) is going to get out of control and all gun owners will pay the price of half-cocked actions.

It's my understanding that both Erie and Oberlin were made to back down and comply to state law by the gun owners. Those battles are now notches in the belt. Next battle, Pennsylvania which may turn completely socialist/anti gun in the next two years if people stay home in the next election.

[BobFromBucks]

That's news to me. The last thing I read about Erie is this on August 21st. And, Oberlin (the city) does not want the litigation cost. Meanwhile, one Oberlin alum offered to buy the parks and make them private. The town isn't sure if her offer is real or not. It is still ongoing unless you heard differently in the last 12 hours or have a DeLorean.

ERIE, Pa. (AP) — A judge has convicted eight people of violating a northwestern Pennsylvania city ordinance banning guns in parks during a rally in support of open-carry laws.

The Erie Times-News says an Erie County judge issued the ruling Tuesday, a day after the men appeared for summary trials in court.

The judge assessed fines and costs of $220.50 against organizer Justin Dillon and the seven other defendants.

Attorney Joshua Prince said he and the defendants were disappointed by the decision and plan to appeal the ruling in Erie County Court.

[JenniferG]

The preemption laws were upheld in Philly and will be upheld in Erie. Oberlin knows they are on the losing side and no one will pay the community the price to buy public parks along with the liability that goes along with them.

[BobFromBucks]

The preemption laws were upheld in Philly and will be upheld in Erie. Oberlin knows they are on the losing side and no one will pay the community the price to buy public parks along with the liability that goes along with them.

You have me confused. You said, "It's my understanding that both Erie and Oberlin were made to back down and comply to state law by the gun owners." But, you apparently agree that Erie's is going to the next level court as stated in the news story and Oberlin's is just warming up. They are both on the losing side of state law. But, there is no guarantee that a long legal battle will be in the favor of gun owners.

However, my primary point is that if you told either Sherrod Brown or Kathleen Kane that a protracted battle against gun rights would take place in Erie or Oberlin, their big smiles would match their Photoshopped campaign posters.

Wrong cities and no plan.

[flyingjunkie]

The thing that frustrates me here is that there are few, if any, people who are willing and/or able to put up a perfectly planned, well orchestrated, fully funded legal battle. I'm sorry, but we can't just sit back and let cities pass unlawful laws just because we're afraid that it might not turn out to our benefit if we fight and lose. We can't just let them walk all over us in hopes that a perfect storm will brew in our favor. While the outcome of the Erie battle or the Oberlin battle may not come out in our favor, we can't just let them walk on us. If we lose this one, we have to pick another one and continue to fight for what we believe in and what is right.