Likwid Posted November 16, 2009 Report Share Posted November 16, 2009 Just got off the phone with Jason Hill at the Attorney General's office, I have been told the Attorney General WILL be appealing. No more information is available and the paperwork takes time, but they WILL be appealing.I asked if the AG plans to file an injunction to prevent Cleveland from enforcing (read that on OFCC so I wanted to ask) and was told "Unfortunately I don't have any information on that".I got the sense that they've gotten a LOT of calls/emails and are prepared with the "We will be appealing" comment.Kudos to the AG's office for getting back to me so quickly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2009 Appealing what? You got a link?Oops' date=' it happened Friday so it may not have become "wild" news.[url']http://www.ohioccw.org/200911134686/cleveland-wins-appeal-regarding-statewide-preemption.htmlBasically, Cleveland sued Ohio for 9.68 and lost, then won on appeal.... it's ridiculous. They sued for violation of home rule, seemed open and shut but the 8th district appellate court overruled the decision... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curby Posted November 16, 2009 Report Share Posted November 16, 2009 cleveland sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2009 Interesting. I don't really go to Cleveland so I don't really care too much' date=' but I really hate that place. It's a shit hole.[/quote']I try not to go to the city of cleveland either, but this sets a dangerous precedence... 9.68 provides a fair amount of protection to citizens... Cleveland seeks to throw it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 16, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2009 Yeah' date=' I see that. Cleveland can ban anything they want to. It doesn't mean guns are going away. Hell, if the feds ban "assault weapons" do you really think those are going away? How are you going to ban something you don't know I have? They banned pot.. people still smoke. Playing by the rules is for pussies and Europeans.[/quote']You're absolutely right, but we've got a double edged sword to deal with, Ohio is a must notify state, so if Cleveland decides to ban ALL guns pray you don't get pulled over or stopped while carrying (yah yah yah 5th amendment) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owndjoo Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 that's retarded! it explicitly says it right in the law. Can't believe the court just ignored an entire part of the legislation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 that's retarded! it explicitly says it right in the law. Can't believe the court just ignored an entire part of the legislationTake a look at the district map... it's hard to believe, but painfully obvious there's a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owndjoo Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 so is that the map of the court districts? cleveland has its own damn district Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owndjoo Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 and i'm retarded, since cincy, and 'bus are the same. but what is the obvious problem? other than it's the cleveland district that upheld it. i'm sure that once it makes it to the osc that it will be overturned to the original ruling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 No, it is retarded, having one county in an appeals district is retarded.Yes, it SHOULD be overturned but there are/will be convictions before the OSC rules on it, and while this will ultimately vindicate those impacted, it's a pain in the ass to wait, plus all their legal fees, and more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedytriple Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Since we are all retarded(or atleast I am) What does all this legal speak mean in retard terms? I looked at it a few times and didnt make much of it? From what I can understand the city of cleveland want to ban the right to own, carry and transfer a firearm? So if I drive to work thru cleveland with my ccw I am breaking the law? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Since we are all retarded(or atleast I am) What does all this legal speak mean in retard terms? I looked at it a few times and didnt make much of it? From what I can understand the city of cleveland want to ban the right to own, carry and transfer a firearm? So if I drive to work thru cleveland with my ccw I am breaking the law?In the most simplistic words, Cleveland wants to maintain/implement restrictions on firearms, previously 9.68 protected all those rights.Clyde v Ohio set the precedent for 9.68, however, Cleveland is arguing Clyde v Ohio ONLY pertains to CONCEALED carry, therefore Cleveland cannot impose restrictions in regards to CONCEALED carry, but maintains it can impose any other restrictions it sees fit.Where this is dangerous, 9.68 says noone in Ohio can attempt to regulate the sale, carrying (openly or otherwise), and transportation of firearms, that only the State can create/maintain the regulations.argh... i am not a lawyer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedytriple Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 As long as I am not gonna get nabbed by the po-po while driving to work. Cleveland is a shit hole so what ever. pass all the laws they want there still gonna be killing each other with non-registered, most likely illeagal guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owndjoo Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 the reason why there is one county for those three areas is due to the immense size of the three C's. Think of the amount of people in Franklin county compared to the rural areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 the reason why there is one county for those three areas is due to the immense size of the three C's. Think of the amount of people in Franklin county compared to the rural areas.Size doesn't matter, as you may have heard before The courts need to be representative, if they are going to make decisions that apply to groups of people they need to be represented by more than just the residents of that county.The districts need to be remapped Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
owndjoo Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 then tell that to the house of reps... it's all about per capita. truly, per capita is the only way of true equal representation. if there are 5 million people in one county, compared to 500,000 spread over 7 counties.... you can't have all the districts be the same size Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Fuck that; do not redistrict me with those assholes. They are representing their constituents the way the majority of them want to be represented. This just goes to show how laws are so arbitrary; this same would have been ruled differently in another district. This will be overturned on appeal, home rule does not allow you to refuse women the right to vote or reinstate slavery, it allows you to pay the dog catcher whatever you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Fuck that; do not redistrict me with those assholes. They are representing their constituents the way the majority of them want to be represented. This just goes to show how laws are so arbitrary; this same would have been ruled differently in another district. This will be overturned on appeal, home rule does not allow you to refuse women the right to vote or reinstate slavery, it allows you to pay the dog catcher whatever you want.I agree with you for the most part... my issue is the appeals judges in District 8 have noone to answer to BUT district 8 voters... while yes, this SHOULD be won on appeal, what about everything that happens in the mean time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 My point is district 8 people (The majority of them.) are getting exactly what they want. This is not a ruling that can be applied in other districts. Do not try to spread the misery to other districts that do not want these types of rulings. This kind of gives you thought as to what laws to obey or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 My point is district 8 people (The majority of them.) are getting exactly what they want. This is not a ruling that can be applied in other districts. Do not try to spread the misery to other districts that do not want these types of rulings.This kind of gives you thought as to what laws to obey or not.Except that they are setting precedence. Precedence applied to state statutes will spread.All JoeTown, Ohio needs to do is create an ordnance saying "No firearms within the city" and they can enforce it now citing Cleveland v Ohio 2009 and UNTIL/IF it's overwritten at the Supreme Court level it IS enforceable.I'm simply saying if you spread it out, there's a chance we (Ohio residents) can prevent these appeals cases from even getting settled this way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 This is a possibility but it will only happen to places that want it to happen. The Clyde case ruling will now be expanded (Not that case specifically.) thanks to the city of Cleveland. Cleveland lost their home rule case to this Supreme Court with the city workers residency issue which I think they should have won. Not a chance they are going to win this one trying to circumvent a general law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 This is a possibility but it will only happen to places that want it to happen. The Clyde case ruling will now be expanded (Not that case specifically.) thanks to the city of Cleveland. Cleveland lost their home rule case to this Supreme Court with the city workers residency issue which I think they should have won. Not a chance they are going to win this one trying to circumvent a general law.Makes sense to me, I despise Cleveland for these reasons. YOU AREN'T A SOVEREIGN NATION! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 None of you have seen the new Cleveland Flag? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Likwid Posted November 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 I love that picture! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod38um Posted November 22, 2009 Report Share Posted November 22, 2009 If I've learned anything from this thread........ its.... Dont go to Cleveland unless you're packing heat! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.