A.W.O.L.: OSHP bureaucrats back out of Ohio Law Enforcement Summit

EXCLUSIVE: Must credit www.OhioCCW.org

For the past month, OFCC has been following an exclusive report that due to
Senate amendments to HB12 dealing with how one should carry a firearm, law
enforcement agencies in Ohio are not in agreement on Am. Sub. HB12.

On September 10, we reported that the Ohio State Highway Patrol (OSHP) had
accepted the invitation to attend an Ohio Law Enforcement Summit Meeting with
the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) and the Buckeye State Sheriff
Association (BSSA).

The meeting was held yesterday, but without the OSHP bureaucracy, who
backed out less than 24 hours prior to the event.

When calling to explain, OSHP Major J. P. Allen said he would not attend unless the Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police (OACP) were invited. (No such request had been made by the OSHP in the 12 days since they had first agreed to attend the Summit). The BSSA, who organized the meeting, said they'd be glad to phone the OACP to invite them, and promptly did so. The OACP leadership (but not most individual, local chiefs of police!) holds a baseless, extreme opposition to ANY concealed carry bill, and thus did not accept the invitation. The BSSA then phoned OSHP Major J. P. Allen again, to say they had invited the OACP, but that they had elected not to attend. Allen stated* that unless the OACP was sitting at the table, they were not willing to attend the Summit meeting.

So now we've come full circle. Sen. Pres. Doug White refuses to appoint conferees to Am. Sub. HB12 because he claims he doesn't have enough votes to override a veto (we have counted votes, and believe otherwise). Gov. Bob Taft threatens a veto unless the OSHP is neutral on a bill. The OSHP is now refusing to meet to discuss the UNSAFE language which they forced into the Senate's amended language, because the OACP is not at the table. Due to the failed leadership of a few Republican politicians, they're now trying to place the fate of your right to self-defense on still another doorstep.

Senator Doug White's refusal to appoint conferees until all sides agree is shameful. How can all sides agree when the only group insisting on dangerous language refuses to discuss their position?

The OSHP's stance is indefensible. It is apparent they know this, because they will neither discuss their position nor answer questions about gross errors in their February anti-CCW form letter, which has been emailed to interested Ohioans who contact the OSHP about their stance against self-defense.

Many have asked why so much emphasis is being placed on the opinion of a few
unelected bureaucrats in the OSHP. The OSHP and Gov. Taft claim that the OSHP makes more traffic stops than other law enforcement organizations do. In fact, in his latest position statement concerning his opposition to concealed carry reform, OSHP Superintendent Paul McClellan says "There are few agencies in the country that interact more with motorists than the Ohio State
Highway Patrol." But the truth is, the sheriff's 88 county offices make twice as many traffic stops as the OSHP. And local municipalities combined make six times the number of stops the OSHP does.

The Ohio Law Enforcement Summit meeting DID occur, and was attended by Ohio's two largest and most powerful law enforcement agencies in our state. Both the BSSA and FOP conferred as follows:

• Ohio's affirmative defense language, which pertains to persons discovered to be carrying a concealed firearm, and which was upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court earlier this week, should NOT be removed from the law. Both organizations support and endorse the removal of this OSHP/Taft-inspired amendment, which not even one anti-CCW Senator (of which there are very
few) was asking for.

• Making citizens repeatedly handle, holster and unholster a loaded firearm is UNSAFE**. These unsafe practices would be mandated as a result of two OSHP/Taft-sponsored Senate amendments.

---> BSSA representatives offered the position that Gov. Taft's lockbox, or carjacker protection, provision should be removed, noting that they would prefer "that a license-holder retain the possession of the firearm on their person." The FOP agreed it would not oppose the removal of the lockbox provision in a conference committee.

---> BSSA representatives offered the position that Senate-introduced language requiring firearms to be stored "in plain view, off of their person in a motor vehicle" should be removed. The FOP agreed it would not oppose the removal of the lockbox provision in a conference committee.

**The OSHP stands alone as the only law enforcement agency in Ohio that has
endorsed these dangerous practices. And they cannot offer legitimate reasons as to why.

The OSHP's stated goal is to "enforce the traffic laws and promote safety on the highways". Since Ohio's major law enforcement agencies' critical safety concerns specifically deal with the language the OSHP demanded the Senate insert, the OSHP bureaucrats' refusal to come to the table to consider these agencies' concerns (whose combined forces make eight times the amount of traffic stops the OSHP troopers do) is negligence is of the worst kind.

The OSHP bureaucracy backed out of a law enforcement summit meeting it had agreed
to attend, and is now refusing to discuss their unsafe policies with Ohio's two largest law enforcement agencies, who represent all Ohioans, in all communities, all rural areas, all municipalities, all cities. As has been obvious from the start, the bureaucrats at the OSHP oppose this bill because of politics, and not facts.

So why IS Senate President White handing all legislative authority to the OSHP?
Rep. Jim Aslanides would like to know as well.

"It is the job of the Legislature to make law," said Aslanides. "The Senate needs to be pro-active in this matter. We, Ohio's elected representatives, are charged with getting the job done. It is time to make CCW the law."

Where are the pro-active Republican leaders in the Ohio Senate? When we informed Sen. White's office of the scheduling of an OH LEO Summit meeting, the communications director for the Ohio Senate Republican Caucus, Maggie Mitchell, told OFCC that Senate President White "supports any efforts that will get us a viable bill."

The LEO Summit meeting is an effort that could do just that. But will White call the OSHP Superintendent Paul McClellan, (the OSHP is 100% taxpayer funded - and the legislature writes the checks), and demand that they step to the table? A leader would.

Your continued voice of opinion to the OSHP, Taft, and your Senator may just
make the difference.

To express your own expectations to the OSHP (politely please!) as a taxpayer, call 1-877-7-PATROL. Emailing your thoughts to the Ohio Patrol Superintendent Col. Paul D. McClellan will only get you back a rhetoric-filled form letter. Finally, some may wish to to download an official OHP complaint form (.pdf file), which can be used to register an official complaint against troopers like Capt. John Born, who are putting lives at risk by telling persons that when attacked in their cars, they should just "drive off."

Click here for an official statement from Sen. Pres. Doug White, and for his contact information.

Click on the "Read More..." link below to read a letter from a retired law enforcement officer, who says anyone telling citizens that firearms are unnecessary in motor vehicles, apparently because they can be driven away from danger "is either completely tactically ignorant, lying, or both. In any case, they're certainly a danger to themselves, their fellow officers, and the public."

* Calls from OFCC to OSHP Major J. P. Allen for verification were not returned.

Reading your site recently I came across statements by your state police suggesting that firearms are unnecessary in motor vehicles, apparently because they can be driven away from danger. Extraordinary. As a retired police officer, I can tell you that any officer who makes that sort of statement is either completely tactically ignorant, lying, or both. In any case, they're certainly a danger to themselves, their fellow officers, and the public.

Any competent officer knows that they are very vulnerable while in their vehicles. Sharp cops are always extra careful when they have to come to a stop, particularly in traffic. If ambushed in that sort of situation, their options are incredibly limited, and their chances for survival are not promising. The same is very much true for a citizen who becomes the victim of a carjacking attempt. Merely driving away is seldom an option, and a car, stuck in traffic, is an inefficient means of escape at best and a very poor means of attack.

Cars are means of transportation, not weapons, though with advance planning, they can be used as weapons. But that is the crux of the problem. Without advance planning, they are inefficient as transporation and as weapons.

That some police administrators might hold such odd and harmful views is not surprising. You can be sure that most rank and file officers--people who are actually in potential danger every day--do not. But of course, their bosses speak for them.

I'm not suggesting that administrators face no danger. They're certainly exposed to paper cuts and stapler injuries. Cops who live in the real world, however, have no such delusions.

Yours,

Mike McDaniel
Joshua, TX