HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Cleveland Heights Must Pa...

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 06:22 AM

 

Cleveland Heights Must Pay Ohioans for Concealed Carry's legal fees for lawsuit

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/08/the_lawsuit_that_ohioans_for_c.html


The concealed-carry group had already won victories over two other Ohio municipalities when it filed suit in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court.
The goal here was to bring Cleveland Heights' 1985 gun-control ordinances in line with the state's 2006 uniform gun law. Among other things, the state law said people with proper permits could carry firearms in parks.
The state law, which has been upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court, blocks communities from passing laws that are more restrictive than state code.
....
Finally in February, the city agreed to pay the group's legal expenses. Gibbon does not remember the exact amount but called it nominal. The city also agreed to pay court costs of $208, according to court records.


Cases like this are why state wide preemption, with teeth, of local firearms laws are needed. Else we get municipalities trying to create a patchwork quagmire of different laws in every town in the state. States need uniformity when it comes to carry laws. It's sad to see that Cleveland Heights was put in their place, but they made their own bed.

Numerous attempts were made to end the issue before the lawsuit was even filed, but the city council turned their noses up at OFCC. Bad idea, now the residents are left to foot the bill for their elected officials hubris.

33 replies, 3426 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 33 replies Author Time Post
Reply Cleveland Heights Must Pay Ohioans for Concealed Carry's legal fees for lawsuit (Original post)
rDigital Sep 2012 OP
Kolesar Sep 2012 #1
rDigital Sep 2012 #2
Kolesar Sep 2012 #4
spin Sep 2012 #14
glacierbay Sep 2012 #3
Kolesar Sep 2012 #5
gejohnston Sep 2012 #6
glacierbay Sep 2012 #7
hack89 Sep 2012 #8
Kolesar Sep 2012 #9
hack89 Sep 2012 #10
Kolesar Sep 2012 #16
hack89 Sep 2012 #20
glacierbay Sep 2012 #22
PavePusher Sep 2012 #11
Kolesar Sep 2012 #15
PavePusher Sep 2012 #24
Kolesar Sep 2012 #26
PavePusher Sep 2012 #32
Jenoch Sep 2012 #12
Kolesar Sep 2012 #27
Kezzy604 Sep 2012 #33
GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #13
Kolesar Sep 2012 #17
GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #18
Kolesar Sep 2012 #19
friendly_iconoclast Sep 2012 #30
glacierbay Sep 2012 #23
Kolesar Sep 2012 #25
glacierbay Sep 2012 #28
Kolesar Sep 2012 #29
friendly_iconoclast Sep 2012 #31
DonP Sep 2012 #21

Response to rDigital (Original post)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 06:30 AM

1. No, this is abuse of power by the Ohio Republicans

They claim they are for "home rule". The Ohio Constitution supports home rule. But they took away municipalities' ability to ensure public safety.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #1)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 06:31 AM

2. NO. They took away municipalities ability to entrap the otherwise law abiding. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Reply #2)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 11:06 AM

4. What loaded bullshit

The police were not "entrapping" anybody

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #4)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 03:13 AM

14. Recently Florida had a patchwork of laws on the concealed carry of firearms. ...

I could have been arrested, as an example, for carrying a firearm in a park in some cities in Florida while it was entirely legal in most other areas of the state. A new law eliminated that problem.

I always try to obey the laws on carrying a concealed weapon in my state. Why should I have to carry a list of the rules and regulations for every city in Florida that I travel through or visit?

I realize that you probably wish to make the laws on legal concealed carry as difficult as possible in order to make the practice less common. That is a typical tactic by those who oppose concealed carry. You simply lack the support to repeal concealed carry. Name one state that passed "shall issue" concealed carry that repealed it.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #1)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 10:58 AM

3. You think that a patchwork of different laws across the state are a good thing?

 

Or is it only good for gun laws?
You think that cities being able to entrap otherwise law abiding citizen's because gun laws are different in Cleveland than in Cincinnati is a good thing?

Why not have uniform laws across the state? Seems like a good thing to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #3)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 11:08 AM

5. Cleveland should have the tools to fight crime per what is applicable to Cleveland

Not the indulgent whims of some pasty faced suburban legislator.

"entrap" -- see above

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #5)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 11:16 AM

6. that is hardly a logical step in fighting crime

permitees are not likely to be criminals because of the background check process. Carrying concealed by non permitees is still illegal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #5)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 11:22 AM

7. Ok I get it

 

you're good with making gun owners criminals in one city but not in another city.
How about abortion? Are you good with one city making illegal and another city making it legal?
At what point do you draw the line?
Or is it just gun owners?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #5)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 11:31 AM

8. So cities and states can enact their own abortion laws? "State rights" is not progressive. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #8)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 11:40 AM

9. that's stupid...eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #9)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 12:03 PM

10. You are the one advocating for states rights

simple question - do you accept the need for nationwide minimum standards for Constitutional rights that states cannot violate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #10)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 06:18 AM

16. "Home rule", clown

Read the whole thread, Mr. Bored Chair-Occupant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #16)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:19 AM

20. No difference - there has to be a national minimum standard for civil liberties

cities and states can certainly grant more expansive rights but they cannot be allowed to restrict enumerated rights below what ever standard the supreme court has set.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #16)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 11:20 AM

22. Now the insults and name calling come out

 

usually the sign that you have lost the argument and that's all you have left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #5)

Sat Sep 1, 2012, 03:37 PM

11. Obstructing lawful gun owners has nothing to do with fighting crime.

 

Going after actual criminals is what constitutes fighting crime.

Logic: It's easy if you try.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #11)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 06:17 AM

15. More RW talking points...eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #15)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 12:16 PM

24. Fighting crime by going after actual criminals is a "RW talking point"?

 

Holy fucking shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #24)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 01:38 PM

26. "Going after actual criminals" presumes that the police are not doing that

You're writing is lame and duplicitous.
You make no case for taking power away from the cities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #26)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 03:14 PM

32. Sorry, cities don't get the power to revoke Constitutional Rights.

 

It's really sad that you think they should be able to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #5)

Mon Sep 3, 2012, 08:02 PM

12. If Cleveland wishes to enact

gun control laws more restrictive of Ohio state laws, then they need to lobby the state legislature to get the state law changed. It's that simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #12)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 01:39 PM

27. The districts are gerrymandered so that RW yee-haws run the Ohio government

Kasich got in narrowly because the teabaggers came out in force last election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #27)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 03:26 PM

33. Well then...

That is the fault is that of the people that didn't vote. If you don't vote in the election then you can't complain about the outcome. The fact that the repubs are in power now in Ohio is the fault of the voters in Ohio who didn't come out to vote against them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 02:03 AM

13. The Florida gun pre-emption law has teeth.

City legislators can be jailed for non-compliance. When that law was recently enacted there was a rush of municapalities to dump conflicting gun laws and get in line with the state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #13)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 07:41 AM

17. Abuse of power

...by the gun nuts in the state government. Did your lovely governor Rick Scott push this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #17)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:10 AM

18. That law seems to be popular with the people.

I don't see any groundswell among the populace to repeal it.

The state law did stop the abuse of power among some local legislators.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #18)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 08:11 AM

19. Because your asshole friends own the media...eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #19)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 02:52 PM

30. You lot sure do get cranky when your pronoia runs into reality...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #17)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 11:33 AM

23. So far, you're the only one here that's being abusive.

 

Try posting w/o being insulting to other members and it will be a much more pleasant experience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #23)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 01:36 PM

25. Do you want a tissue to cry into? eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #25)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 01:43 PM

28. Nope, I'm a big boy

 

just pointing out that people like you are what makes DU suck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #28)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 02:17 PM

29. If you haven't enjoyed DU in your fourteen days here, you can leave...eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glacierbay (Reply #23)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 02:58 PM

31. Meh. Personally, I find insults by the politically ineffectual somewhat less than stinging.

Besides, their true colors show when they act out...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rDigital (Original post)

Tue Sep 4, 2012, 10:57 AM

21. I hope we get a nice picture of this check too, like the one we got from Rahm to the SAF

Maybe, if enough pictures of big ass checks to 2nd amendment groups are published, some of the petty urban dictators in these cities will start to think twice before pissing away millions of $ in tax revenue and realize there's a real, tangible price to be paid for ignoring the constitution.

For those of you supporting a city or state's "right" to set it's own standards, congratulations for being in the same camp as George Wallace who believed exactly the same thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread