who is the reporter??
http://www.cleveland.com/search/index.s ... 2#continue
Plain Dealer article
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
-
- Posts: 826
- Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 12:17 pm
- Location: Franklin County
-
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 10:06 am
Re: Plain Dealer article
No reporter specifically is named. However, Brent Larkin has gone on record saying he'll take responsibility for it.mdad wrote:who is the reporter??
-
- Deceased
- Posts: 9710
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:31 am
- Location: Toledo
Weapons bills insult the public
More at:The Plain Dealer wrote:Weapons bills insult the public
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Nearly 18 months ago, the Ohio legisla ture unwisely voted to give most Ohi oans the opportunity to carry concealed weapons. Since then, almost 45,000 permits have been issued.
The effect has been negligible, neither substantiating the claims of proponents that it would improve public safety, nor validating opponents' fears of increased mayhem.
The measure appears simply to have brought Ohio into line with the 45 other states that allow some form of concealed carry. Now, two Republican members of the House are spoiling to make a bad law worse.
http://tinyurl.com/85moj
TunnelRat
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
-
- Deceased
- Posts: 9710
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:31 am
- Location: Toledo
Is this true? I am not familiar with Brinkman's bill.The Plain Dealer wrote:One particularly onerous portion of a measure sponsored by Cincinnati Republican Rep. Tom Brinkman would end the ban on carrying concealed guns on university campuses and at day-care centers. It would also remove the requirement that motorists with concealed-carry permits keep their guns in a locked box in their vehicles.
Would it allow concealed carry on campus? Somehow I doubt that.
Or at day-care centers? Is that right?
The last one -- that motorists with concealed-carry permits now must keep their guns in a locked box in their vehicles -- is false. So am I to assume that the ditzy reporter doesn't understand the proposed change here either?
TunnelRat
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
-
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 11:05 pm
This has to be the most ignorant article I have ever read. According to the following, I take it that this paper believes all information about everyone that the government has, or has access to should be public? I wonder if they feel that way about their info, or their childrens information. It just seems so silly to me.
"The permit information belongs to the public, which pays for its collection and storage, as well as the salaries of those who do the work. That lawmakers would show such flagrant disregard for the public's rights is reprehensible."
I apologize for ranting, I just never heard such ignorance before. It's shocking in a way.
"The permit information belongs to the public, which pays for its collection and storage, as well as the salaries of those who do the work. That lawmakers would show such flagrant disregard for the public's rights is reprehensible."
I apologize for ranting, I just never heard such ignorance before. It's shocking in a way.
-
- Deceased
- Posts: 9710
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:31 am
- Location: Toledo
No, they are seeking to end the abuse of the system by newspapers....The Plain Dealer wrote: Now lawmakers are seeking to close off public access completely.
No, this information does not belong to the public, and our lawmakers have specifically said that it does not. There is a lot of private information gathered by public officials that is not made public. Since when has this been the criteria for releasing personal data?The Plain Dealer wrote: The permit information belongs to the public, which pays for its collection and storage, as well as the salaries of those who do the work.
No, rather that newpapers and their sloppy reporters would show such flagrant disregard for the public's rights is reprehensible.The Plain Dealer wrote: That lawmakers would show such flagrant disregard for the public's rights is reprehensible.
TunnelRat
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago
When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
-
- Posts: 9557
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:36 am
- Location: Youngstown OH
Tom:
Brinkmann's bill is the "Alaska/Vermont" bill....
Probably not a chance.
There's also the Democrat's bill that takes back "lock the gun in your car on University campuses" and does a few other nice things for us.... Probably no chance....
Regards,
Brinkmann's bill is the "Alaska/Vermont" bill....
Probably not a chance.
There's also the Democrat's bill that takes back "lock the gun in your car on University campuses" and does a few other nice things for us.... Probably no chance....
Regards,
Stu.
(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)
(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)
יזכר לא עד פעם
(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)
(Why do those who claim to wish to protect me feel that the best way to do that is to disarm me?)
יזכר לא עד פעם
-
- OFCC Coordinator
- Posts: 11621
- Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 10:22 am
- Location: Greene County
- Contact:
I guess I'm just easily confused. If this is so:
...then what's the justification for this statement:The effect has been negligible, neither substantiating the claims of proponents that it would improve public safety, nor validating opponents' fears of increased mayhem.
Do people even read what they write anymore?The measure appears simply to have brought Ohio into line with the 45 other states that allow some form of concealed carry. Now, two Republican members of the House are spoiling to make a bad law worse.
Total repeal of ALL firearms/weapons laws at the local, state and federal levels. Period. Wipe the slate clean.