Concealed gun law
'unfair'
Opponents
of Ohio law argue case in Hamilton County court
By Dan
Horn
The Cincinnati Enquirer
Opponents of Ohio's
concealed weapons law say ordinary citizens have as much reason to carry a
gun as police officers.
In both cases, they
say, the gun is for personal protection.
The argument was made
in a Hamilton County courtroom Thursday by attorneys seeking to overturn an
Ohio law that forbids anyone but police from carrying concealed guns.
The attorneys say the
law is unfair because it does not allow law-abiding citizens to protect
themselves.
Judge Robert Ruehlman
heard arguments on the issue Thursday during a hearing in Hamilton County
Common Pleas Court. The hearing was the latest in a series of battles that
will determine whether the law is constitutional.
The battles began in
July when four Cincinnatians sued every law enforcement agency in Hamilton
County, claiming police had no right to arrest people for carrying concealed
weapons.
Those law enforcement
agencies asked the judge Thursday to throw out the lawsuit.
"There is no
constitutionally protected right to carry concealed weapons," said
Richard Ganulin, an assistant city solicitor in Cincinnati.
Mr. Ganulin argued that
the Second Amendment, which guarantees the right to bear arms, does not
guarantee a right to carry concealed weapons.
Judge Ruehlman said he
would rule on the city's request to dismiss the suit within a few days. The
judge already has said he "has problems" with the concealed
weapons law and has even declared it unconstitutional.
Although an appeals
court reversed that decision and reinstat ed the law, the judge will get
another chance to weigh in during a trial in October.
The four Cincinnatians
who filed the lawsuit are confident the judge will rule in their favor.
Their attorney, Tim Smith, said the city's request to dismiss the case is
"way off base."
He said the U.S.
Constitution may not mention concealed weapons, but it does guarantee
citizens the right to protect their own lives.
Mr. Smith said his four
clients are seeking the same rights as off-duty police officers, who are
permitted by the city to carry guns.
In effect, he said, the
city allows its off-duty officers to violate the concealed weapons law.
"When (they) carry
concealed weapons, it's for themselves. Not for any public good," Mr.
Smith said. "That's exactly the reason these four individuals want to
carry a concealed weapon."
Mr. Smith and his
clients have said they took their case to court because the Ohio legislature
has failed to pass new laws that would allow them to carry concealed
weapons.
They say they favor a
system in which citizens with no criminal records would be issued permits to
carry concealed guns.
Source: Enquirer.com |