A couple of things bothered me about this article, found in my local newspaper.
“I agree with the right to bear arms, but my children play in a park,” said Councilwoman Phyllis Howard, who called the change an “accident” waiting to happen. “It’s just ridiculous to allow in a park. What in the world would you need a concealed weapon for in a park?”
What about the concept does this Councilwoman not get? I honestly don’t know what the crime rate is of Beavercreek Parks, but it’s one of the first places I would want to carry, especially if my children played there. Turns out that Phyllis Howard is a Republican, which I was very shocked to hear. It goes against the grain. I thought all Republicans were for guns and Bible. Apparently, not this one. Why wouldn’t I want to conceal-carry in a park? Last time I checked, the Greater Dayton Area did not have a huge police presence in the local parks, Beavercreek included.
Furthermore, why just parks? If we are going to ban firearms from parks, why stop there? I see children at the malls, grocery stores, gas stations, and plenty of other places. If the true problem is “it’s about the kids”, why draw a line there?
Do I need to bother pointing out that the mass bloodshed, expected years ago in Florida, never happened? It hasn’t happened in any of the states that allow concealed carry. Some states even let you go into a restaurant and have a drink!
And then we have this smaller gem,
John Mahoney, deputy director of the Ohio Municipal League and which advocates on behalf of cities and villages, had filed a brief with the Supreme Court in support of a municipality’s ability to ban guns from parks. He said he was not aware of many municipalities needing to alter existing ordinances because, before the conceal carry law, walking around with a gun was not allowed anywhere.
I’m not sure if he misspoke, was misquoted, or just generally doesn’t have a clue. The Ohio Conceal Carry law, put in place in 2004, did not allow people to walk around with guns. It has never been illegal to open carry in Ohio. Our state Constitution says that we have a right to defend ourselves. The CC law simply put a provision in place that allowed Ohioans to do it concealed. In 2007, Ohio lawmakers became even smarter by creating the preemption law, ORC 9.68, which states
(A) The individual right to keep and bear arms, being a fundamental individual right that predates the United States Constitution and Ohio Constitution, and being a constitutionally protected right in every part of Ohio, the general assembly finds the need to provide uniform laws throughout the state regulating the ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transport, storage, carrying, sale, or other transfer of firearms, their components, and their ammunition. Except as specifically provided by the United States Constitution, Ohio Constitution, state law, or federal law, a person, without further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process, may own, possess, purchase, sell, transfer, transport, store, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition.
This is the law that is forcing Beavercreek to change its ordinances. Englewood did the same thing, I believe last year, as a result of a lawsuit by a Englewood Citizen who was stopped in the park for carrying in 2006 or 2007. It basically makes it illegal for any municipality to create an ordinance that bars me from carrying in publicly owned areas except for places already forbidden by state or federal law. Strangely enough, it has been the efforts of our Democratic State Attorney General, Richard Cordray, that has helped change a lot of the attitudes that exist with city officials and LEO’s in our state. Now if we can just get Cleveland to buckle down and fly right, we would really be doing well.
If you liked this post, perhaps these may also please you:


