The hypocrisy of the leaders of Colón: We will not abide by the law, but you must abide by it (2023)

Columbus City officials expect their residents and businesses to comply with the city's new firearms regulations or face the consequences of fines, imprisonment, or both.

And yet these same extremist officials seem willing to ignore state laws and aOhio Supreme Court decision in 2010- The first clearly establishes that municipalities do not have local authority to make "general laws" on firearms and now knives, and the second establishes that this state law is constitutional.

In the end, it is Columbus taxpayers who can face the real consequences for the actions of the owners of their money.

oSecond Amendment to the United States Constitution, Of course of course. The State's preferential right is clear. And the Ohio Supreme Court's decision is final, or should have been: the state statute does not violate Article XVIII, Section 3, of the Ohio Constitution. (Scroll to PDF page 130/148.)

The absurdity of this: Columbus leaders expect you to follow a law that is itself illegal. Except that his "illegal" actions would have legal consequences; not hersThe city took care of itselfmock the law and the supreme court.

Columbus isn't the first district to attempt this, but unless this type of action is handled with a degree of consistency, it won't be the last.

But do not worry.Cleveland couldn't get away with it, and we won't even leave Columbus. did we get here?

Here's some important information about state law, the Supreme Court decision, and what Columbus is doing with the blessing of a Fairfield County judge.

'Lei Geral' of Ohio: ORC 9.68

Ohio Revised Code Section 9.68, enacted in 2006, establishes not only bans on firearms and knives related to political subdivisions, but also remedial measures for those adversely affected by such decrees.

The judicious approach taken by the Ohio General Assembly was simple: bring uniformity to the state by replacing the patchwork of local firearms ordinances that vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

For example, imagine a handful of counties that require front signs so that their officers can guide readers past them. Or suppose some cities have banned the use of LED headlights. These local laws would create legal chaos and imprison law-abiding citizens.

Here is an excerpt from the law (see bold):

(A) The individual right to keep and bear arms, which is a fundamental individual right that predates the United States Constitution and the Ohio Constitution and is a constitutionally protected right in all parts of Ohio,The General Assembly believes that there is a need to enact uniform laws throughout the State governing ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transportation, storage, transportation, sale, other transfer, manufacturing, taxation, custody, and reporting of loss or regulation. theft of firearms, their components and their ammunition and knives.The General Assembly also considers and affirms that it is appropriate for law-abiding persons to protect themselves, their families and others from trespassers and assailants without fear of prosecution or civil liability for acting in their own defense or the of others. Except as expressly provided in the Constitution of the United States, the Ohio Constitution, state or federal statutes, a person may, without any additional license, permission, restriction, delay, or process, including by ordinance, rule, regulation, order , practice or other action or threat. subpoena, prosecution, or other legal process, you may possess, possess, buy, acquire, transport, store, transport, sell, transfer, manufacture, or maintain any firearms, firearm parts, their components, and ammunition, and any knives . Any other authorization, permission, restriction, delay, or prosecution violates the fundamental individual right described in this section and unreasonably prevents law-abiding individuals from protecting themselves, their families, and others from trespassers and assailants and from others. constitutionally legitimate uses of resources. firearms, including hunting and sporting activities, and the State supersedes, supersedes, and voids, by this section, any other licenses, permits, restrictions, delays, or processes.

(B)A person, group, or entity adversely affected by any form of ordinance, rule, ordinance, resolution, practice, or other measure enacted or enforced by any policy subdivision in violation of Section (A) of this Section may bring a civil action. against the Political Subdivision for damages from the Political Subdivision, a declaratory judgment, an injunction, or a combination of these remedies.The damages awarded will be awarded and paid by the Political Undersecretary.

2010 Ohio Supreme Court decision

The city of Cleveland and then-mayor Frank Jackson took an extremist view, claiming the state law violated the Ohio Constitution.March 2007 to issue a declaratory sentence with the hope of preventing the entry into force of the new law. Three legal steps were needed to reach a final result.

The key to the Supreme Court's 5-2 decision inCleveland vs. Ohio Statewas to decide whether ORC 9.68 is common law. The lower court said yes. So the Court of Appeals said no. But the Supreme Court concluded that it was, in fact, common law and therefore did not violate the Ohio Constitution.

The conclusion:

RC 9.68 addresses the General Assembly's concern that without a unified national law, law-abiding gun owners would face a bewildering patchwork of license requirements, possession restrictions, and criminal penalties when traveling from one jurisdiction to another. . We believe that R.C. 9.68 is a general law that supersedes local firearms ordinances and is not unconstitutional in violation of the local authority of local government. In addition, we understand that the authorization to award costs and attorneys' fees in R.C. 9.68 does not violate the doctrine of the separation of powers.

Columbus actions and a Fairfield County judge's decision

It appears that Columbus leaders have not learned from Cleveland's repeated mistakes, choosing instead to waste taxpayer money by trying to ignore the law. At first they tried to sound the alarm about a public health crisis, but apparently abandoned the idea. Instead, on December 5, the Columbus City Council passed gun ordinances.

As approved by the City Council, the new regulations that came into force at midnight on January 21:

  • Ban "high-capacity magazines" that can hold 30 or more rounds or can be converted to hold as many rounds. This offense would result in a mandatory 180 consecutive days in prison without a work permit and possibly up to one year and a $1,500 fine.
  • In addition to the crimes of negligent homicide and negligent bodily harm is "keeping or leaving a deadly weapon" in the home in a manner in which a minor could reasonably have access to it. It is presumed that the storage of weapons in a safe case or with a trigger lock was carried out with due care. Violators face a third degree misdemeanor or, if a minor gains access to the weapon, a fourth degree misdemeanor. Having a weapon in your home or under your "immediate control" would not be an injury.
  • Prohibit any person from recklessly selling, lending, giving, or furnishing a firearm to another person who is known to have reasonable grounds to believe that the firearm is not in their lawful possession. A perpetrator may face a first degree misdemeanor.

Fairfield County Judge Richard Berens in January. twenty(Process No. 2022 CV 00657) ruled that the city could proceed, saying, in part, "In this matter, the court finds that the plaintiff (the Ohio State Attorney's Office) has failed to establish, through clear and convincing evidence, that there is a substantial probability that the plaintiff will prevail in the matter".

Basically, Berens is saying that the state has not presented convincing evidence that the city violated the constitution. However, he is rather ironic, considering that the Supreme Court has already ruled that the state law itself is not a violation of the Constitution.

Robert Triozzi, then Cleveland's legal director, acknowledged the implications of the 2010 Supreme Court ruling.according to a story on

"The impact is that municipalities are no longer able to take adequate measures to protect their citizens from the unique effects of gun violence in an urban setting, despite the numerous acts of gun violence across the globe." state in the nearly five years since the legislature passed a 'comprehensive' gun safety law in this state," he said in a statement.

Of course it didn't stop there.Mayor Jackson faces another failed attemptto circumvent state law. In fact, it took another judge to stop them.Cuyahoga County Judge Brian Corrigan ordered Cleveland to cease all enforcement in May 2011.of 19 separate local gun control ordinances that will take effect immediately.

What do we do now?

As mentioned above, if Columbus' new gun laws are upheld, the floodgates will open for other cities to ignore state laws and proceed with similar ordinances.

We disagree with Berens and believe that the case against Columbus will prevail on the merits.

Berens also said that he does not believe the author has shown that the citizens of Ohio would "be irreparably harmed" by allowing the city to move forward.

We do not agree on this point either: whoever is accused of a crime can be the first to be hurt; then the losses could benefit Columbus taxpayers, who would bear the cost of undoing it all.

Still, until the heads of political sub-departments are forced to face the consequences of their actions, what incentive do they have to stop? Just as they expect their residents to face fines and prison terms for violating their laws, they must also be held accountable.

You are not above the law.

Joe D. "Buck" Ruth is a former small game hunter and gun owner who has spent nearly three decades in the news industry. In his spare time, he enjoys playing bass, fishing, and searching for buried treasure with his metal detector.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Msgr. Benton Quitzon

Last Updated: 04/02/2023

Views: 5529

Rating: 4.2 / 5 (63 voted)

Reviews: 86% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Msgr. Benton Quitzon

Birthday: 2001-08-13

Address: 96487 Kris Cliff, Teresiafurt, WI 95201

Phone: +9418513585781

Job: Senior Designer

Hobby: Calligraphy, Rowing, Vacation, Geocaching, Web surfing, Electronics, Electronics

Introduction: My name is Msgr. Benton Quitzon, I am a comfortable, charming, thankful, happy, adventurous, handsome, precious person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.