View Single Post
Old August 28, 2012, 01:12 PM   #36
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 1,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zukiphile
...OC has not been prohibited by law in Ohio going back at least two decades. ...It took people pressing the point to start to change the culture so that Ohioans don't end up with a felony conviction for exercising a right in ordinary circumstances....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Ettin
Two decades is pushing it. I think the 2003 decision of the Ohio Supreme Court in Klein v. Leis, 99 Ohio St.3d 537 had more to do with it.
The court in Klein did confirm that OC was legal under the then existing statutory scheme. In recognising this it upheld Ohio's effective ban on concealed carry. However there was not a general statutory prohibition on OC prior to the decision in Klein. It was a matter of police policy to charge and prosecute OC as concealed carry.

People in Ohio marched for the purpose of confirming that right and confronting a police culture that too often viewed a person armed as a problem. Subsequent to those demonstrations, a concealed carry law passed.

It isn't an inexorable result of activism that you will get laws we dislike.

EDITED TO ADD -Frank Ettin, Aquila Blanca appears to have the sequence of events correct. The OC marches worked politically because there was significant political will to challenge police conduct judicially, and the heavy hand of police organisations politically.

Remember that the decision in Klein affirmed the constitutionality of concealed carry prohibitions. It isn't obvious that such a decision would be an unambiguous aid to concealed carry advocates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
As a friend once pointed out, "there's a difference between a woman fighting oppression and a fat white dude strutting around with a gun."
Indeed, there are many differences, but they aren't pertinent where Parks' name is invoked as an example of pressing for recognition of a right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
The problem with the "movement" is that it really does attract folks from the fringe, and there's little way of controlling the more extreme elements.
You get this with free speech and non-establishment advocacy too. I suppose it would be more comfortable to argue the merits of a wide zone of carry freedom if only PLUs were involved and we limited actions to letters to the editor from our offices. Yet, life always seems messier.

You might not feel comfortable at the sight of advocacy from the weirdo in camo trousers, bandana for a hat and an obtuse manner, but the OC right isn't a right if he can't exercise it too.

Last edited by zukiphile; August 28, 2012 at 01:25 PM.
zukiphile is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.05586 seconds with 7 queries