Stepping on our rights

[BEARCLAW]

Peoples Rights Organization4444 Indianola Avenue Columbus, Ohio 43214
Ph: (614) 268-0122
http://www.PeoplesRights.org
8/11/2005
[size 5]Columbus Gun Ban Goes Into Effect TODAY[/size]

8/11/2005
The City of Columbus's draconian gun ban goes into effect today. There is a 90-day grace period, during which time gun owners can register their guns they feel may be affected by this ban with the city.
PRO IS RECOMMENDING that people NOT register their guns, but move them out of the city until this matter is settled in the courts. There is a great deal of confusion about what guns this ban covers. Because a provision in the new law stipulates that guns that are registered cannot be later sold or willed to a gun owners' heirs upon her death, this is essentially a gun "surrender/confiscation" law, as well. It makes no sense to register lawfully owned guns for later surrender to the city with no compensation, so we urge you to move and store your firearms outside the city limits.
Peoples Rights Organization historically has taken legal action in these kinds of matters. We will have an announcement in the coming weeks.
Gun owners in the city are fuming, but most everyone else is indifferent. The only people cheering this move are Mayor Michael Coleman, who continues to promote the fact that he drove away the NRA and its $20 million in economic benefits that the 2007 convention would have brought to the financially beleagured city, and the out-of-state anti-gun groups (Toby Hoover's Toledo-based Coalitition Against Gun Violence; the San Francisco Legal Community Against Violence, which wrote the Columbus ordinance; and the former Handgun Control Inc., now known as the Brady Campaign). Council Member Michael Mentel is staying quiet on the issue, since Council recessed for the month of August.
One lawsuit has already been filed by a Columbus City Council candidate who says the ordinance violates state probate law. Additional suits are expected to be filed. And as stated earlier, PRO will have an announcement in the coming weeks.
Stay tuned for more information on this matter.
8/3/2005
Columbus city officials today will unveil their registration scheme through which citizens are to "register" their firearms if they meet the definition of a so-called "assault weapon" under the wide-ranging gun ban passed by City Council on July 11. The ban goes into effect on August 11, and city residents have 90 days from that date to register or dispose of their firearms that meet the city's definition of an assault weapon.
The city has devised a form, which can be accessed via the city's website, to be mailed in. The mail-in method is hoped to to encourage people to comply with the controversial new ordinance. Of course, easy process or not, criminals still won't be registering their guns. Even the assistant city attorney who worked on the language for City Council, Josh Cox, admitted to the Columbus Dispatch in a story a few weeks ago that the ordinance will have no effect on criminals. One lawsuit already has been filed on this issue, and others are expected.
Look for media coverage on the registration forms on August 3. The city website, where residents can learn more about the ban, print a registration form, and try to determine whether their gun meets the ordinance description, is [url "http://www.columbuscitycouncil.org/assaultweaponban/awbfaq.htm"]http://www.columbuscitycouncil.org/...weaponban/awbfaq.htm[/url].
The city's website includes links to illustrations of various types of guns, even though the vaguely worded ordinance appears to cover many more guns than members of City Council mentioned when they worked for nearly nine months to terrify Columbus residents into supporting this law. There also is a link where you can download the form that is to be sent in to the city to register a firearm that is suspected of being an "assault weapon.
A REMINDER: Peoples Rights Organization is recommending that residents move any firearms they suspect might be covered by the ordinance outside the city limits until this matter is settled by the courts. This is important because the new law includes a draconian provision that prohibits gun owners who register their guns from ever selling their firearms, or leaving their guns to their heirs or loved ones upon their death.
[signature]

[cat_man]

[pirate]Yeah and you know what else? I think that the wives of those owners of these guns are witches too!!! They've been casting spells on the poor unsuspecting townsfolk for years now!! We've got to do something about that right away too!! Cast 'em in the lake with a brick tied to them. If they don't drown it's proof they're a witch, if they do drown, then ooops sorry, but at least you died for a good cause -- keeping the residents safe![][mad]
[signature]

[davetclown]

It would do far better to add a seprate fight at the back door along with atacking from the front door with state madated compliance laws.

what I mean by putting a fight at the back door is to start a recall on every one of those who suported this ban. open up the books, start cleaning house, start digging though their trash. find reasons for having them removed from office and dont quit untill they are out. cause if they loose here they will take it up to the next level by gaining higher offices. time to nip their buds...

keep us posted as to the what happens...
[signature]

[BEARCLAW]

Excellent ideas there Dave. Another way to stick it to em is make sure you support the NRA. As far as I can tell they are the single biggest gun-rights lobby group we have on our side.
[signature]

[gdn443]

What has the NRA done for you folks at this point in time. They did some great stuff here in CT. to nip this sort of thing in the bud. I know they can't be taking a back seat on this.
[signature]

[davetclown]

an artical came out in yesterdays paper I think you might want to check out....

---

New CCW law hasn't resulted in 'Wild West'


There have been no shootouts at local fast-food restaurants following disputes over who was in line first, nor has there been vigilante justice carried out by armed citizens since a signficant change in the state's approach to issuing concealed weapons permits four years ago.


The Dodge City, OK Corral, and Wild West-style gun fights in the street predicted by those opposed to a change in the concealed weapons law have failed to materialize. The naysayers who voiced opposition to the new law, which opened the door for more individuals to carry a concealed weapon (CCW) have been silenced — not literally, but figuratively.


The number of CCW permits issued in each of the last four years has fluctuated; and although the numbers are appear to be up overall, there may not be a significant upward trend in CCW permits issued. But that doesn't mean there hasn't been controversy over the CCW laws, which continue to evolve.


Prior to changes in the CCW laws that were implemented in 2001, county gun boards — which were responsible for considering CCW permit applications and issuing the permits — differed in their policies and procedures. Oakland County was known to be stingy with CCW licenses, while neighboring Macomb County generally approved applications.


Then came the bill provided for uniform standards and removing most discretion from county gun boards.


Supporters of the initial CCW legislation objected to the proposal's details. While the bill signed by former Gov. John Engler that became Public Act (PA) 381 created a "shall issue" policy on CCW permits, the law also imposed gun training requirements that previously did not exist for applicants. The legislation also contained restrictions on where CCW permit holders would be allowed to carry a concealed weapon. "Gun-free" zones were established — to include churches, sports arenas and college dormitories. Despite opposition to some aspects of the CCW legislation, proponents claimed Michigan would have some of the toughest gun standards in the nation if the bill was enacted.


Before the new law took effect on July 1, 2001, opponents, led by the Michigan Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence and People Who Care About Kids, launched a campaign to block the law. It was argued that the legislature added a $1 million appropriation to the bill — an addition made during the final legislative negotiations — primarily as a way to prevent the bill from being overturned by a voter referendum. Michigan's Constitution states any bill containing an appropriation cannot be subject to a voter referendum.


After opponents submitted an estimated 260,000 registered voters' signatures in March 2001 calling for a voter referendum in 2002, the law became the focus of a legal battle that eventually went to the state Supreme Court. On June 29, 2001 the court ruled 4-3 that the appropriation — ostensibly providing the necessary funding for the Michigan State Police to implement the new law — protected the reform measures from a voter referendum. The Supreme Court struck down a decision made by a Circuit Court judge the previous month, and on July 1, 2001, the law was implemented.


Initially, opponents indicated that a second petition signature drive would begin. In time, the effort was canceled, as the CCW reform foes recognized that the campaign for such an issue would be more expensive than practical.


Four years later, it seems concerns about simple disputes being solved by gun battles in the streets were overblown. Even Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard says concerns over the CCW reforms — and the potential for gun violence — was more hype than reality.


"I don't think there have been many problems at all," Bouchard said. "We are one of the largest issuing counties in the state in terms of raw (CCW permit) numbers. Typically, what you find is that people that are law-abiding individuals are the ones that are going to go through the process to be licensed to carry (a concealed weapon)."


Bouchard admits that the uproar over the new CCW law was blown out of proportion. The fear that traffic altercations would end up in gun battles never materialized.


"There was a lot of misconception about what would go on," he said.


Most local law enforcement officials agree.


West Bloomfield Police Lt. Carl Fuhs said he's not aware of any problems related individuals with CCW permits within the township.


"(There have been) none," Fuhs said.


Most lakes area peace officers, whether they are with the Sheriff's Department or part of a local, municipal police department, agree that concealed weapons have not become a problem in the lakes area.


Bouchard has discounted growth in CCW permit figures as increases, noting that yearly permit figures also include permit renewals.


"A big number of those are renewals and we don't have 5,000 new ones each year," Bouchard said. "While our numbers are trending up, I think that they have leveled off."


According to the sheriff, CCW permits are valid for five years.


According to the Oakland County Clerk's Office, 5,617 county residents received CCW permits during the 2001 calendar year. That number went down in 2002 to 4,936. In 2003 the number went down further to 3,954 but went back up again in 2004 to 4,956. According the clerk's office there were 5,369 CCW permit applications filed by county residents from Jan. 1 to July 31, 2005.


The state tracks CCW permit figures from July 1 through June 30 of the next year.


In Oakland County, the number of CCW permit applications submitted from July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2004 was 4,705, according to the state. Of those applications, 4,227 permits were issued. There were still 441 pending at the time the report was completed.


The State Police reported for the time period of July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002 — the first full year the new CCW law was in effect — there were 7,809 applications for conceal weapons permits filed across the state. Of those applications, 6,901 CCW permits were issued — 29 of those permits were issued to convicted of felonies and subsequently revoked.


According to the Oakland County Clerk's Office, the chief reason why a CCW permit is not issued is because of an applicant's felony or misdemeanor conviction in the last eight years, depending on the severity of the misdemeanor. A CCW permit holder must reapply for their CCW permit every five years.


Bouchard said that after five years those with a CCW permit are coming back to get them renewed and there appears to be no significant increases on the horizon.


"I think that will be the trend for the future," he said. "Most are coming back for renewals."


Figures for overall gun registration in the county paint a different picture. Only handguns need to be registered with the state. Rifles, shotguns, and weapons primarily used for hunting are not required to be registered with the state.


In West Bloomfield Township, for instance, the number of handgun registrations has nearly doubled in the last four years, according to the Michigan State Police. In 2000, there were 356 handguns registered with the state by township residents. In 2004, that number jumped to 631. In the first six months of this year, there were already 377 handgun registrations processed.


Just north of West Bloomfield, in Waterford Township, the numbers have fluctuated. In 2000, there were 1,065 handgun registered with the state by township residents. Those numbers had been slowing increasing. The number reached 1,505 in 2002. However, as of the first six months of this year, there has been a significant drop — 160 handguns have been registered since the beginning of the year.


Handgun registration figures for individual communities are counted by the state based on an individual's mailing address


In some of the other lakes area communities, there has been little change in the number of handgun registrations.


In Wolverine Lake Village, there were 46 handguns registered in 2000. This year, so far, there have been 43.


Still, most local communities have seen steady increases over the past few years. Highland Township had 172 handguns registered in 2000. That number nearly doubled in 2004 when 302 handguns were registered by people with a Highland address.


Walled Lake has seen a steady increase in handgun registrations since 1999, when 124 weapons were registered. In 2001 and 2002, 146 handguns were registered. A slight dip was recorded in 2003 with 69 gun registrations, but 177 were registered in 2004. The first six months of this year have produced 129 handgun registrations in the city.


Handgun registration applicants with a Wixom address numbered 114 in 1999; 136 were registered in 2001; and 192 handguns were registered in 2002. A total of 161 guns were registered in 2004, and 114 have been registered in the first six months of 2005.


Orchard Lake gun registrations numbered 24 in 1999; 2000 produced 14 registrations; and 47 guns were registered in 2002. A total of 45 guns were registered in 2004, with 306 registered thus far in 2005.


In Milford Village and Township, 169 handguns were registered in 1999, with 123 registered in 2000. That number grew to 207 in 2001 and to 274 in 2002. Milford gun registrations dropped to 244 in 2003 and to 209 in 2004. So far this year 142 handguns have been registered to people with a Milford address.


The number of handguns registered to people with a Commerce address has fluctuated since 1999, when 57 handguns were registered to Commerce addresses. The figure jumped to a high in 2002 with 168 handguns registered, but has been declining since then. A total of 72 handguns were registered in 2004. In the first six months of 2005, 146 handguns have been registered to Commerce applicants.


Municipalities that contract the Oakland County Sheriff's Department to patrol the community, are showing growth in handgun registration.


The total number of guns registered in Oakland County by the Sheriff's Department in 1999 was 2,989. Five years later, in 2004, there were 4,078 handguns registered. In 2005, the county is looking at registering over 5,000 handguns. As of July 1 of this year, 2,496 hand guns were registered in communities that employee Oakland County Sheriff's Department deputies.


Four years after CCW reform legislation became law, the debate over concealed weapons remains, albeit at a quieter level.


Concerns about restrictions on where CCW holders may carry a weapon have surfaced and prompted subsequent legislation, especially after Sept. 11, 2001. Shortly after the terrorist attacks on America, it was discovered that airports had not been included in "gun-free zones" as established by the state's new CCW laws. The oversight was quickly addressed.


Omissions like that continue to be uncovered. There's now a controversy in Waterford Township over allowing library patrons to carry a concealed weapon into the facility, even if they have a legal permit to do so.


Waterford Township Supervisor Carl Solden, a former law enforcement officer himself, has tried to stay out of the controversy but admits there isn't much that can be done other than to adhere to state law.


"Our librarian wanted to update our code of standards and ethics (for library users) and I told her to get with our township attorney to make sure that whatever she did was satisfactory, and then bring it before the township board," Solden said.


The attorney must have "missed" a problem provision in the proposed code, because the policy that was approved by the the township board included a ban on carrying guns inside the library, according to Solden.


"We had a citizen and a gun advocate come to a board meeting saying that we were superseding state law and that they can carry guns, with a permit, in libraries. They were upset that we were going to ban guns," Solden said, adding that the township is obligated to abide by the law a let a person with a valid CCW permit carry a weapon inside the library.


"We have to," he said. "There may be some different thoughts on the board, but the Legislature passed a law that says you can carry (concealed) weapons if you have a permit, and the library is not on the list (of gun-free zones) like schools are."


Asked whether he believes libraries should be included among the places a CCW permit holder can carry their weapon, Solden said "Yes, I think they should. It's really an extension of the schools. There are kids in there. I don't see any sense in it. I told the gun advocate that."


Solden said he didn't feel it was necessary to bring guns into the library and questioned why libraries were left of the list of places where concealed weapons are banned.


"Why a library was left out, I don't know," Solden said. "But we will abide by the law. We're going to deal with it and get beyond it. I think this is an issue that we have spent way too much time on anyway."


The Waterford Township Board of Trustees will discuss the issue of carrying guns into the library during a meeting a Monday, Aug. 22 meeting.


The tweaking of the CCW law in Michigan continues. Rep. Rick Jones (R-Grand Ledge) recently introduced legislation that would keep CCW permit holders from having their permits expire while they are still under review for renewal. House Bill 4643 would allow for an extended period until the gun board issues or denies a permit renewal.


"Renewal applicants are law-abiding people," Jones said. "If they were going to commit a crime, they wouldn't applying for a renewal."


According to Jones, this amendment to the CCW law would eradicate "red tape" while getting a CCW permit renewal.


Currently, those who are licensed to carry concealed pistols often apply to renew their five-year licenses early, to ensure the license doesn't expire before a renewal is obtained. The permit renewal applications are reviewed by county gun boards, and include a fingerprint check completed by the State Police. The renewal process usually takes 45 days, although some counties with a high population and many permit holders are reported to take as long as six to eight months to complete the renewal process. In counties where the wait for a renewal is long, the legislation would help to ensure that licenses won't expire during the renewal application process.


Jones has also introduced legislation that would allow permit holders carry a concealed weapon registered to their spouse. That bill, House Bill 4642, was introduced earlier this year and sent to the House Conversation, Forestry, and Outdoor Recreation Committee.


"Rather than make a husband and wife buy another gun, we let the CCW holder carry their spouse's," Jones said. "This is just plain common sense that makes the CCW permit more user-friendly to the good, law-abiding residents of Michigan."
[signature]