(COLUMBUS, Ohio) – Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine and Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt have signed an agreement permitting reciprocity between their states for citizens who have valid concealed carry permits. "This…
Another accidental firearm fatality prompts question yet again: Who is to blame when children have accidents with guns?
by Chad D. Baus
As the editor of news content at BuckeyeFirearms.org, I peruse a great deal of gun-related news each and every day, and am usually among the first to learn of incidents involving accidental shootings.
While nationwide statistics prove that at the same time gun ownership in America is at an all-time high, and firearm accident fatalities are at an all-time low (it is 3 times more likely that a child will be struck by lightning than die from a firearm accident), ANY accidental death is tragic.
Last Wednesday, March 14, such a tragedy came to my northwest Ohio neighborhood, when a 13 year-old boy in Wauseon was shot to death on the way to school after he and a 14 year-old friend stopped by a third boy’s house. Early reports were sketchy and in some cases wildly inaccurate, but it appears that the 14 year-old aimed a 12 gauge shotgun at the victim and accidentally fired it, striking the victim in the chest at close range.
When I first learned of the tragic circumstances, my mind immediately went to the commands I taught my boys beginning at the age of three about what to do if they see a gun:
“STOP! Don’t Touch! Leave the area! Tell an adult!”
VICTIM ZONE: Four stabbed at downtown Columbus office building
by Chad D. Baus
The stabbing of four people in a downtown Columbus office building, and subsequent shooting of the knife-wielding assailant by police, has made national news headlines over the past two days. Glaringly absent from news coverage, however, is any mention of the fact that the building is a “no-guns” zone, thanks to Ohio laws which prohibit concealed carry in government buildings (the building houses offices for the state attorney general) and college campuses (the building houses Miami-Jacobs Career College).
Important Pro-Gun Legislation to be Introduced in the Ohio House of Representatives
Please contact your state representative NOW!
by Ken Hanson
State Representative Terry Johnson (HD-89) is circulating a letter inviting fellow legislators to co-sponsor an important bill he will soon be introducing to address several problems with current gun laws by:
- Establishing an automatic reciprocity between Ohio and other states that have automatic reciprocity for their concealed handgun licenses. Currently, the Attorney General must enter into a written agreement with another state to establish reciprocity. This bill would still allow for written agreements between the states if the other state does not have automatic reciprocity, but it eliminates the requirement for a written agreement if reciprocity can occur automatically by operation of law.
- Eliminating the renewed competency certification requirement for concealed carry licenses. Currently, after the first renewal of your concealed handgun license, you must submit proof of renewed competency to show that you are range competent for all subsequent renewals. This bill would make it so that you can simply show your existing or expiring license or your original competency certificate as proof that you have had the necessary training for all renewals.
- Changing the definition of a loaded firearm in a vehicle. Currently, a firearm is considered loaded if a loaded magazine is present in the vehicle, even if the magazine is not inserted into the firearm. This will change the definition so that the magazine must be inserted into the firearm before it is considered loaded.
- Defining “Concealed Handgun License” in one section of the revised code and clarifying that the definition applies to all references to a concealed handgun license in the revised code. This will simplify the code and make it easier to read, understand, comply with, and enforce.
CLICK HERE to contact your state Representative and urge him or her to cosponsor this critical legislation and mention that the deadline to do so is this Tuesday, March 20 by 5:00 pm.
USSA: Santorum Provides Views on Sportsmen’s Issues
Editor’s Note: Although his campaign spending dwarfs Rick Santorum and other challengers, Mitt Romney, the only remaining Republican presidential candidate with an anti-gun record, is struggling to win the votes of more than a third of his party’s primary voters in most states. The following interview wasn’t released in time to influence voting in Ohio, but it is being offered here as a service to the many states who have yet to vote.
Columbus, OH) –On the day before the pivotal “Super Tuesday” primaries, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum sat down for an interview with the staff leadership of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance to discuss issues important to hunters, trappers and anglers.
The USSA staff present for the interview with Santorum were: Bud Pidgeon (President and CEO); Rob Sexton (Senior Vice President); Doug Jeanneret (Vice President, Marketing); and Evan Heusinkveld (Director, State Services).
Here is the interview by issue topic:
Topic One: Hunting Recruitment and Hunting Access
Jeanneret: One of the issues facing sportsmen these days are dwindling numbers of sportsmen. It’s a really big issue. The conservation community, every national group… if you talked to any of them it’s a concern of theirs. One of the things we would like to ask you, the Department of Interior oversees U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees federal game laws. In your opinion, should they be helping us create hunters, fishermen, trappers and promoting that ethic out there?
Santorum: I hear you but I am looking at where we are from the standpoint from the deficit. I mean a lot of people ask me, where are you for federal dollars for this or that? We are borrowing 42 cents of every dollar right now and for me to commit any new dollars to do anything would be a tough thing. If you are talking about within the literature, for example that comes out, and we do things to talk about hunting and fishing opportunities… if it’s in the context of what the agency generally does and making sure that people are aware of opportunities and things like that to sort of reinforce the importance or nature of the sports. I have no problem with that. It’s different if you’re saying we need to spend new dollars to do this.
“No-guns” zone at Afghanistan’s Camp Leatherneck: U.S. Marines ordered to disarm before listening to secretary of defense speak
by Chad D. Baus
The New York Times is reporting that American Marines operating in war-time Afghanistan were ordered to disarm before being allowed to listen to a speech by President Obama’s Secretary of Defense, Leon Panneta.
From the article:
In a sign of the nervousness surrounding the visit, Marines and other troops among the 200 people gathered in a tent at Camp Leatherneck to hear Mr. Panetta speak were abruptly asked by their commander to get up, place their weapons — M-16 and M-4 automatic rifles and 9-mm pistols — outside the tent and then return unarmed. The commander, Sgt. Maj. Brandon Hall, told reporters he was acting on orders from superiors.
“All I know is, I was told to get the weapons out,” he said. Asked why, he replied, “Somebody got itchy, that’s all I’ve got to say. Somebody got itchy; we just adjust.”
Normally, American forces in Afghanistan keep their weapons with them when the defense secretary visits and speaks to them. The Afghans in the tent were not armed to begin with, as is typical.
According to the article, American officials later said that the top commander in Helmand, Maj. Gen. Mark Gurganus, had decided on Tuesday that no one would be armed while Mr. Panetta spoke to them, but the word did not reach those in charge in the tent until shortly before Mr. Panetta was due to arrive.
General Gurganus told reporters later that he had wanted a consistent policy for everyone in the tent, and that “I wanted to have the Marines look just like their Afghan partners.” He insisted that his decision had nothing to do with the shooting on Sunday. he said.
The Times also quoted Gurganus as saying the first-ever incident of disarming troops for an address by their own secretary of defense “is not a big deal.”
Got that? Imposing the same lack of trust they obviously have for the Afghans in the room on our U.S. servicemen and women is no “big deal.”
No Fear – Former Ohio police detective espouses concealed carry
“I would recommend to every citizen in this country, from 21 to 101, to obtain your concealed carry license.”
The following incident in Ohio just this week stresses the points made in the above video all too well:
Woman Tells 911 Operator ‘Oh God, He’s In’
Father arrives home to hostage situation, is shot and still manages to return fire and stop his attacker
by Chad D. Baus The Daily Jeffersonian of Cambridge, Ohio is reporting that a hostage situation led to a pair of shootings in Guernsey County’s Liberty Township on February 28 and sent…
Op-Ed: Disarming Pilots – Plane Foolish
by Tracy W. Price In response to the 9/11 attacks, many airline pilots have been trained, deputized as federal law-enforcement officers and armed since 2003. Now the Obama administration wants to gut…
Shooting for Liberty – States competing for lowest Brady score
by Jeff Knox
The Brady Bunch has released their annual scorecard rating states based on how strict their gun laws are. The scorecard is a very useful tool to help rights groups understand how their state compares to others on a liberty scale; more points = less liberty.
Alaska, Arizona, and Utah have all achieved the coveted Zero Points/Zero Stars on the Brady scale and are now competing to see which state will be the first into negative numbers – which is possible through bonus points. Arizona and Alaska can reach a –2 point score by protecting carry rights on campuses of state colleges and universities. Utah already has such protections, but could achieve a –2 score by adopting Constitutional (permitless) Concealed Carry as Alaska and Arizona have. Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, and Oklahoma all came in with just 2 points apiece and all have a real shot at beating the leaders into negative numbers with the right combination of reforms.
The Brady Center released this latest scorecard with much hoopla and heavy breathing, but their own data clearly shows that there is no correlation between gun control and criminal violence. Crime statistics vary widely – from high to virtually non-existent among the 40 or so states Brady ranks as “poor,” while several of the Brady’s highest ranked states have some of the highest rates of violent crime. As a matter of fact, a full 25% of all violent crime in the US occurs in the Brady’s top four states with the most severe firearms restrictions. Of course the Bradys and their political allies argue that the tight restrictions are a response to the high crime, but most of the restrictions have been in place for years, if not decades, and they have proven to be completely ineffective at reducing criminal violence.
Violent crime is a result of numerous factors, with poverty, population density, education, social and moral supports, and drug and alcohol abuse being chief among them. While it is difficult to prove whether fewer restrictions on firearms results in less crime, it is easy to demonstrate that stricter gun laws do not reduce violent crime – or accidents or suicide.