OFCC puts Section 9 violators on notice

7:01pm Monday, March 29, 2004

From the moment the first reports of counties or municipalities passing concealed carry bans on public property broke, Ohioans For Concealed Carry has been informing our website readers that these laws were a violation of Section 9 of House Bill 12. As of this week, the violators are also being put on notice.

Below is a copy of a letter served to the City of Chardon, Ohio. Similar letters are being served to cities, counties and townships across the state, when applicable. For a complete list of recipients, click here and consult the list of taxpayer-funded entities.

March 26, 2004

VIA FACSIMILE AND REGULAR US MAIL

James Gillette
Law Director
City of Chardon
111 Water Street
Chardon, OH 44024
Facsimile: (440) 286-2658

Subject: Chardon Ordinance No. 2200 and
Am. Sub. H.B. 12, Section 9

Dear Mr. Gillette:

I am writing to you on behalf of Ohioans for Concealed Carry to advise you that Ordinance No. 2200 adopted by the City Council of Chardon on March 11, 2004 is in conflict with Am. Sub. H.B. 12, passed earlier this year by the Ohio General Assembly, and to ask that you recommend the immediate repeal of Ordinance No. 2200 to the Council of the City of Chardon at its regular meeting on April 8, 2004.

Section 9 of Am. Sub. H.B. 12 provides, in its entirety, as follows:

No municipal corporation may adopt or continue in existence any ordinance, and no township may adopt or continue in existence any resolution, that is in conflict with those sections, including, but not limited to, any ordinance or resolution that attempts to restrict the places where a person possessing a valid license to carry a concealed handgun may carry a handgun concealed

Am. Sub. H.B. 12 is effective on April 8, 2004.

Ordinance No. 2200 purports to prohibit persons from “carrying a firearm or concealed handgun” onto “all buildings, lands and premises owned by the City of Chardon.” This would include city parks, the municipal cemetery, and city-owned parking lots.

The prohibition in Ordinance No. 2200 against carrying concealed weapons onto city property is clearly preempted by Section 9 of Am. Sub. H.B. 12. In addition, any attempt to prohibit open carry on city property or within the City of Chardon would be unconstitutional under the holding of Klein v. Leis, 99 Ohio St.3d 537 (2003), that carrying a firearm is a fundamental right protected by Article I, Section 4 of the Ohio Constitution.

I want to thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter. I am sure that there was no intent on the part of the council members to violate Ohio law. I have served on our city council myself, and I understand these issues are new to everyone involved. If you have any questions, feel free to give me a call.

Best Regards,

John Fenton
Attorney at Law
Norwood, Ohio

---------------------
Ohioans For Concealed Carry was a funding co-plaintiff in the recent challenge to Ohio's concealed-carry ban, "Klein et. al vs Leis et. al", in which two Ohio courts unanimously ruled Ohio's laws prohibiting possession of a firearm by a law-abiding citizen violated numerous Constitutional and civil rights, including equal protection, due process and the right to carry a firearm for self-defense.

The Ohio Supreme Court, which ultimately decided the case, ruled that bearing arms for self-defense is a "fundamental individual right" under our Constitution.

We are prepared to vigorously defend attempts by these public entities to place restrictions on Ohio's new concealed carry law.

Please forward reports of any potential violations to [email protected].

Join the fight to protect your right by joining Ohioans For Concealed Carry!