1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Cleveland to Stop Enforcing Local Gun Control Laws

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by wireguy, May 26, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. wireguy

    wireguy TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,715
    http://www.theoutdoorwire.com/story/1306394011qh89yh6aqxn

    Thursday, May 26, 2011

    Court Orders Cleveland to Stop Enforcing Local Gun Control Laws
    DELAWARE, OH - Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Brian Corrigan has ordered Cleveland to stop any enforcement of 19 separate local gun control ordinances, effective immediately.

    Buckeye Firearms Foundation is the lead Plaintiff in the case, which was filed in early 2009.

    In the interim, Cleveland sued the State of Ohio in an attempt to have the state's firearm laws declared an unconstitutional usurpation of a city's home rule authority. In December 2010, the Ohio Supreme Court entered final judgment against Cleveland, ruling (for a second time) that the state's laws were valid.

    The ordinances invalidated dealt with gun registration, owner I.D. cards, assault weapon bans, limits on firearm dealers within city limits, possession of firearms in parks and other public places, seizure and destruction of firearms, storage of firearms, reporting theft of firearms and concealed carry of firearms.

    Judge Corrigan wrote, "R.C. 9.68 clearly invalidates any and all municipal ordinances regulating 'the ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transport, storage, carrying, sale, or other transfer of firearms, their components, and their ammunition.'" Judge Corrigan set July 7, 2011 as a hearing on Buckeye Firearm Foundations request for mandatory attorney fees. The Ohio Supreme Court has already upheld the validity of the mandatory attorney fee provision.

    Attorney Ken Hanson, who represented Buckeye Firearms Foundation in the litigation, said "We are gratified that the trial court took the time to understand the arguments and the law, and consider the case without being sidetracked by emotional, discredited arguments. Public records requests clearly showed that these ordinances were almost never used to prosecute criminals, and instead operated only as a bar to ownership/possession by those inclined to follow the law in the first place."

    Jim Irvine, a board member of Buckeye Firearms Foundation, observed "When we originally filed this case, Cleveland Law Director Robert Triozzi said the case was 'more of a publicity stunt than a legal maneuver' and concluded that none of the city's ordinances conflicted with state law. Clearly this ruling shows that he was wrong on both counts, and it is the taxpayers of Cleveland that will end up paying for his incorrect conclusions."

    Download the ruling here.

    Buckeye Firearms Association is a grassroots political action committee (PAC) dedicated to defending and advancing the right of Ohio citizens to own and use firearms for all legal activities, including self-defense, hunting, competition, and recreation. We work to elect pro-gun candidates and lobby for pro-gun legislation.


    For more information, please visit www.BuckeyeFirearms.org.

    Follow BFA on Twitter and Facebook!
    Contact:
    Ken Hanson
    Email: khanson@fbylaw.com
    Phone: 740-215-6433
    Additional Media Information
     
  2. shot410ga

    shot410ga Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,794
    If I lived or visited Cleveland, I would want to be pack'in. Likewise, in South Los Angeles where it's still illegal.
     
  3. School Teacher

    School Teacher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,054
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    This is a beneficial outcome for gun owners in Cleveland and other cities throughout the United States although it only pertains to Cleveland, Ohio.

    The underlying issue is the sovereignty of the State of Ohio over cities within its boundaries.

    My understanding is that states are recognized in the US Constitution as having sovereignty over defined geographic areas. Counties or parishes are recognized as public corporations within a state with defined geographic boundaries as defined in state constitutions. Cities are also public corporations based on clusters of population with specific categories or classes as defined within a states constitution.

    As cities have become larger, they have attempted to challenge the sovereignty of the state in which they reside based on a legal argument called “home rule”. However, unless there are specifically enumerated powers for cities in state constitutions or laws, cities are subservient to the state in which they reside.

    Gun control is but one of many issues on which cities and states come into conflict. Another area is local taxing authority and limits.

    Ed Ward
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.