House Passes ''Amy's Law''

WCPO.com reported Friday that lawmakers in the Ohio House of Representatives have passed House Bill 29, named for a local survivor of domestic abuse.

"Amy's Law" will make it tougher for first-time domestic violence offenders to get out on bond. The measure is named for Amy Rezos, a Liberty Township woman whose husband tried to kill her three times. The bill now goes before the Senate.

The subject of protecting domestic violence victims is one that quickly comes to mind when discussing the Media Access Loophole. Some of the same Representatives and Senators who are supporting Amy's Law are the ones who continue to struggle with understanding why publishing CHL-holders' names in the newspaper could prove dangerous.

Consider the following recent dialogue between OFCC and a proponent of open records:

Question: I've heard the argument that an abused ex-wife want to keep it quiet that she is carrying a concealed weapon. But what about the abused ex-wife who wants to know if her ex is packing?

Answer: It's actually more common to hear from people who want to keep their location a secret, not that they are carrying. People who are trying to hide from an abusive spouse or stalker cannot afford to have their name, country of residence and birth date published in the newspaper or made available as a public record. That is MORE than enough info to definitively locate a person using the Internet.

Also, it is completely naïve for the abused ex-wife to believe she CAN know her ex is carrying a firearm if these records are public, because countless criminals carry illegally and commit crimes with their illegally-possessed/obtained/carried firearms every day. Amy Rezos' husband didn't get a CHL. How could public records have helped her in the slightest? This is similar to the gun ban lobby claiming people have a right not to be around people carrying hidden guns. Don't they read the crime blotters? Who do they think they're kidding? At best, public records helps citizens know the identities of all the "right" people who are carrying, but does NOTHING to help ID the criminal predators among us.

One other concern for publicly announcing who is carrying is that it defeats the element of surprise for anyone who bothers to check their target before they plan an attack. If a woman like Amy Rezos gets a CHL and carries for protection, do you think printing that information in the paper is a good thing? Is she more or less safe if her attacker (or hit man) knows she is armed? Give this knowledge to her attacker, and the element of surprise is removed. Any attack plan will simply be modified into an ambush plan.