Editorial conundrum: Cops know best…but don't trust cops
The Marion Star has published one of the most illogical editorials to date from newspapers attempting to make a new case for why, despite the absolute success of Ohio’s concealed handgun license (CHL) law in the first year, the law should not be amended to be more user-friendly.
In the editorial, the Star takes the following positions:
- 1) The newspaper opposes improving Ohio’s CHL law to remove the ridiculous "plain sight" language from rules governing CHL-holders in motor vehicles.
2) The newspaper opposes removal of the Media Access Loophole, a provision which currently allows journalists the privilege of obtaining the name, age and county of residence of CHL-holders from sheriffs.
The positions come as no surprise. But the reasoning behind them is incredibly revealing.
Why does the Marion Star say "plain sight" language should remain? Because law enforcement (the Ohio State Highway Patrol) thinks it should.
Why does the Marion Star say the Media Access Loophole should remain? Because you can’t trust law enforcement!
Click on the "Read More..." link below for more.
That's right – when it agrees with them, the Star is all-too-willing to adopt a position that law enforcement lobbyists represent a higher-moral authority that must be listened to.
Yet when scrambling for an excuse as to why journalists need access to the private information of what have proven to be an incredibly law-abiding group of Ohioans, the Star claims "without that access, there would be no way of keeping tabs on the people administering the law. The people charged with the responsibility of granting permits for other people to carry concealed weapons have to be accountable. It is a big responsibility. Not allowing access to those records makes that accountability impossible."
Aside from the fact that the accountability the media claims is necessary would still be provided for even if the Media Access Loophole were removed (via an annual report submitted each year by the Ohio Attorney General), the repeated bifurcation of the gun ban extremists' arguments against lawful concealed carry is growing more tenuous with each passing day.
Which is it? Are law enforcement lobbyists to be taken as the highest authority, or to be observed with suspicion and held under constant observation?
The editorial concludes by saying that "unless legislators have a compelling reason to change [the current CHL law] - a reason that can be backed up with evidence - then it should be left alone."
OFCC has spent the past year providing evidences of abuse of the Media Access Loophole, and of the fact that criminals are indeed capable of using information such as this to their advantage.
Ohio CHL-holders have spent the past year providing evidence that they can be just as responsible as citizens in any other state – perhaps more so - and deserve to be able to travel about like the others do.
For the first time in the long public debate of concealed carry reform in Ohio, the burden of proof lies on those arguing positions similar to the Marion Star, and not on CHL-holders, to prove why Ohio's concealed carry law should not be made more user-friendly. To no one's surprise, they’re striking out.
- 1019 reads
