Dispatch Editorial: ''Ohioans shouldn't be invited to carry concealed weapons''

On Thanksgiving Day, the Columbus Dispatch printed an embarrassing (for them) editorial about concealed carry that can be found by clicking here.

The incredibly flawed editorial suggests that the Buckeye State Sheriff's Association supports HB274 because they would profit from the licensure fees.

Anyone who bothered to read the bill would know that this is absolute hogwash. According to HB274, as passed by the House, sheriffs are required to create a special fund, and the proceeds can only be used to run the license process and firearm safety training.

The Dispatch editors can be written at [email protected]. As always when writing letters to the editor, they are more likely to be printed if they are short, and especially if you live in the Dispatch's distribution area.

Commentary by Chad D. Baus: Shouldn't it be a requirement that persons employed on editorial boards of newspapers actually know what they're talking about?

Anyone who desires to honestly report on this issue wouldn't go to these lengths to lie about the contents of the bill.

Turn the heat down Ohioans shouldn't be invited to carry concealed weapons
Thursday, November 28, 2002

The General Assembly, overly dominated by reactionary Republicans, is considering two issues at the end of the year that should have remained permanently pigeonholed. One is the proposal to put video slot machines at Ohio's racetracks and the other is to allow most Ohioans to begin carrying concealed weapons just about anywhere they go.

The Dispatch has explained the wrongheadedness of the former on a number of occasions, most recently yesterday. But not since spring has the latter shown much life.

At that time, Senate President Richard H. Finan, R-Cincinnati, said lawmakers had little interest in working on the legislation until after the Ohio Supreme Court rules on a case that challenges the constitutionality of the state's longtime ban on carrying concealed weapons.

Now Finan says that because "the court isn't moving,'' the Senate will take up the bill that misguided House members passed in March. He has noted that the National Rifle Association, a key backer of the bill, and the Fraternal Order of Police, which has been less than wildly enthused with it, are likely to help craft amendments.

The FOP is expected to push for increasing the firearms education and training requirements as prerequisites to receiving concealed-carry permits. How that will gel with whatever the NRA might prefer is anyone's guess, considering the gun lobby generally wants few restrictions on access to firearms.

Lawmakers who are catering to the gun lobby, perhaps in response to campaign funding from this group, know that the FOP's endorsement of the bill is crucial for it to stand any chance of gaining Gov. Bob Taft's approval. Taft has promised to veto any measure that lacks the backing of Ohio's law enforcers.

So far, only the Buckeye State Sheriffs' Association has moved into the concealed-carry camp, probably because its members, as key administrators of the permit program, would collect fees for their departments. The FOP correctly sees that a law too lenient is a public-safety hazard. But the organization has hinted that its members might sign off on a bill with provisions that ensure only well-trained gun handlers receive permits.

Regardless of whether the FOP can be satisfied, the Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police, State Highway Patrol and prosecutors are unlikely to go along. These groups recognize that separating the criminals from law-abiding citizens can become much more difficult when people in all walks of life suddenly start packing heat.

Taft should stick to his guns and veto any bill that lacks the full support of these groups -- and these groups should keep up the pressure against this bill. Increasing the number of weapons carried on Ohio's streets -- and into restaurants and other public places--is a bad idea.