Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

A sub-forum for the purpose of discussing ORC 9.68 compliance. This sub-forum is strictly for the discussion of progress in individual cities and their respective parks.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Forum rules
This sub-forum is strictly for the purpose of submitting of, and status updates related to, ORC 9.68 compliance. This could mean park bans, open carry bans, or anything that is a compliance issue. Note the format in which original threads were created. We'll track each individual case here and post updates if assistance is needed, etc. You may start a new thread here to notify us of a non-compliant scenario. Please try to research contact information for each city, village, etc, Email, fax, and postal addresses are great. Digital photos of infractions (Signs) are ideal. With limited exceptions this is NOT a discussion forum.

READ THIS BEFORE POSTING
Post Reply
GWC
Posts: 4494
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 12:12 pm
Location: Lake County 44077

Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by GWC »

SH has the same registration, ID card and gun dealer provisions that Cleveland Heights has.
"The police are not here to create disorder. They are here to preserve disorder".
Mayor Richard Daley, 1968

I am not a lawyer. Nothing I say or write is legal advice.
User avatar
jgarvas
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 3163
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 10:35 pm
Location: Northern Summit County
Contact:

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by jgarvas »

Letter sent 9/29 to council, law director, Mayor.
Jeff Garvas, President
Ohioans For Concealed Carry

Contrary to a popular belief when I brag about OFCC accomplishments I'm not looking for your thank you or personal recognition. I'd much prefer you send me an email telling me when you are going to get involved in doing what I've been doing since 1999. We are only as effective as we make ourselves. We need the next generation of OFCC to step to the plate.

Is that you?

To Contact Me: Use This Form and pick my name.
mrbone
Posts: 2223
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 2:50 pm

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by mrbone »

Shaker Heights I think has more than Cleveland Heights handgun registration and dealer bans. It also has:
* Trigger lock law for handguns. See 753.02
* Ban on magazines over 10 rounds in capacity and a ban on firearms with a single evil Brady feature. See ordinance 749.13.
* Car transport storage laws that mirror the old law so conflicts with the new one. IE - Says the glovebox must be locked, etc. 749.04.
* Ban on openly carrying any weapons in public, including rifles, handguns, and shotgun. It's codified ordinance 749.11. It has an exception for CHL holders in compliance with CHL law. This may be one they may try to defend by arguing there is no general law in conflict with an open carry ban.
* Punishment to a firearms owner if a minor could have gained access to his firearms, even if no minor actually grabs it. See 753.15. I don't know the state law surrounding minors to know if this is in violation of any state laws. Sure does stink since it's vague, not really saying how inaccessible it must be. It also means that if you have children then you can't teach them to stay away from your firearms and legally keep it easily accessible for yourself in case of an emergency, like in your nightstand or under your bed.

If someone hears of the Shaker Heights City Council taking up this issue at a meeting, please post here. I may want to attend it.
User avatar
AlanM
Posts: 9435
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:38 am
Location: Was Stow, OH now Charlottesville, VA

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by AlanM »

mrbone wrote:Shaker Heights I think has more than Cleveland Heights handgun registration and dealer bans. It also has:

* Ban on openly carrying any weapons in public, including rifles, handguns, and shotgun. It's codified ordinance 749.11. It has an exception for CHL holders in compliance with CHL law. This may be one they may try to defend by arguing there is no general law in conflict with an open carry ban.
Just ORC 9.68
AlanM
There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men. - RAH
Four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo - use in that order.
If you aren't part of the solution, then you obviously weren't properly dissolved.
mrbone
Posts: 2223
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 2:50 pm

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by mrbone »

AlanM wrote:
mrbone wrote:* Ban on openly carrying any weapons in public, including rifles, handguns, and shotgun. It's codified ordinance 749.11. It has an exception for CHL holders in compliance with CHL law. This may be one they may try to defend by arguing there is no general law in conflict with an open carry ban.
Just ORC 9.68
I was mistaken about that. 9.68 does seem to codify open carry, so their open carry ban is in conflict with 9.68.
Brian D.
Posts: 16229
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by Brian D. »

Update?
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!

********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
User avatar
djthomas
Posts: 5961
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by djthomas »

Nothing confirmed from the city, I'm not in a position to get over to that side of town anytime soon so if anybody is in the area to check we can get this one updated.
mrbone
Posts: 2223
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 2:50 pm

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by mrbone »

The city posts all its city council agendas and minutes on their website. The minutes usually take months to be published, but the agendas are pretty up to date. I can say from those that the issue has never been on the official agenda.
User avatar
Johnny Glocko
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 8:25 am
Location: Cuyahoga County

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by Johnny Glocko »

I apologize for the necrothreadia -- and I understand that this is likely not high on the list of priorities -- but it does not appear that Shaker Heights ever took any action on this. Council meeting minutes do not seem to be available online any longer; however, the offending sections of the ordinances remain (e.g., here). Any thoughts on whether it's worth pursuing? Any other Shaker residents?

Brian
docachna
Posts: 2175
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 9:26 am
Location: Mount Juliet TN

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by docachna »

Johnny Glocko wrote:I apologize for the necrothreadia -- and I understand that this is likely not high on the list of priorities -- but it does not appear that Shaker Heights ever took any action on this. Council meeting minutes do not seem to be available online any longer; however, the offending sections of the ordinances remain (e.g., here). Any thoughts on whether it's worth pursuing? Any other Shaker residents?

Brian
If anybody up around Clevesburg does decide to pursue it, I suggest pointing out to them OFCC's suit against Cleveland Heights, which was made necessary solely because CH ignored repeated attempts to engage them in rational dialogue about apparent ongoing violations of Ohio law being committed by CH. Shaker would do well to review the Complaint filed by OFCC, then review their own city ordinances to determine the degree to which they are currently out of compliance.

The attorneys' fees awarded to OFCC were totally unnecessary expenditures of tax dollars by Cleveland Heights. Likewise, any attorneys' fees incurred by OFCC or any citizen in the course of enforcing Shaker's compliance with O.R.C. 9.68 would be unnecessary as well, but would nevertheless be similarly recoverable against Shaker Heights.

My guess is, once they're reminded that their next-door neighbors recently got publicly burned to the tune of a few grand, and that attention is now being directed toward their own statutory scheme, a bit more interest may be displayed than that shown by Mr. Gibbons over in Cleveland Heights. If Shaker can't learn from the missteps of their brethren, then they deserve the ultimate outcome.

As to availability of council meeting minutes, they have to provide you copies. If they try to gouge you in the cost, get back on the board. IIRC, Cuyahoga County just recently got smacked for trying to rip off requesters of public records. By all rights, Shaker should be particularly sensitive to that issue right about now - but you never know with "public servants". :roll:
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE
User avatar
Johnny Glocko
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 8:25 am
Location: Cuyahoga County

Re: Shaker Heights - Sent 9/29

Post by Johnny Glocko »

Coincidentally, I had occasion to notify a Shaker Heights police officer a few days ago. He didn't ask to see my handgun owner's identification card, as required by Shaker Heights Code Sec. 753.04. In fact, he dismissed my notification with a wave of his hand, and asked me what I carry (G26). Turns out he carries a G27 off-duty.
Post Reply