Cleveland City Council will consider legislation tonight meant to keep “firearms out of the hands of children, irresponsible adults and criminals.”
According to a council spokesman, the legislation would:
– prohibit carrying a concealed deadly weapon or handgun, unless the person is a police officer or a person who holds a license to carry a concealed weapon.
– require a person who sells or transfers a gun – and who is not a licensed gun dealer – to report such transactions to police.
– require an owner to report a lost or stolen gun to police.
– create a gun offender registry, requiring individuals convicted of a gun offense to register their names with Cleveland’s Safety Director.
– prohibit the display, marking or sale of a facsimile firearm and prohibits brandishing a facsimile firearm in the presence of law enforcement or with the intent to frighten people.
– prohibit the negligent transfer of a firearm to a felon or intoxicated person.
– set restrictions for firearms in the hands of minors and restricts discharging firearms in public areas, including schools, churches, cemeteries, playgrounds and parks.
– require owners to safely store firearms to keep them from being stolen or out of the hands of children.
The language mostly mirrors state law. Notably, the creation of a gun offender registry would be new to Cleveland. Mayor Frank Jackson has spoken on many occasions about this idea. One up-front goal of the registry would be to more easily track gun-related transactions in the city.
Last week, after a 3-year-old boy shot and killed a 1-year-old relative, Police Chief Calvin Williams said: “The fascination with handguns, not just in the city, but in the country, has to stop. We need to take a long look at what we’re doing on the state, local and national level to keep these guns out of our communities.”
This article appears in Apr 15-21, 2015.
Cleveland has been sued, and lost, numerous times for trying to make its own gun laws. How is this time different?
Since when did rights become fascinations?
The second amendment of the United States Constitution states:
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Obviously the need for a state militia has been replaced by the National Guard and Coast Guard whereby trained military personnel are entrusted with the defense of this country against domestic enemies. Their weapons are tightly controlled and safeguarded.
The only two reasons for a citizen to own a firearm are for hunting or
defense of the household from intruders. In either case, ownership of a handgun, shotgun or rifle is more than adequate to satisfy these purposes. There is absolutely no need for any U.S. civilian to own any weapon more powerful or sophisticated than these.
Accordingly, all handguns, shotguns and rifles must be licensed and registered to the degree necessary to match weapon to owner at the click of a computer key. Furthermore, if we had prohibited the purchase of more sophisticated weapons several innocent victims would not have died or been harmed at shopping malls, college campuses and Congressional meetings.
I wonder how many millions in legal fees the city will needlessly spend defending this legislation that could be spent on something meaningful. How many times does the city have to lose in court before they realize the state has jurisdiction here?
The right of the people to keep and bare arms,…. It does not say the right of a well regulated militia….. Who are you to decide what weapons I chose to protect my family and property????
2nd Amendment is my gun license and that’s all I need….,
Maybe they should train their Police officers in hand gun safety, instead of writing laws already struck down as unconstitutional..,,,,,
Ohio gun rights groups will be taking Cleveland’s money. This is prohibited under ORC 9.68. Cleveland isn’t allowed to make local gun law and can’t get it through their thick liberal heads.
Joe Bialek 1,
“The only two reasons for a citizen to own a firearm are for hunting or defense of the household from intruders.”
Oh so very wrong, on so many levels. The 2nd Amendment says nothing about hunting (not a right guaranteed by law), or even personal defense; as this was considered a god-given and natural right.
The founders specifically put in the 2nd Amendment as a backstop to the 1st – as they knew that all government, unrestrained, would eventually become despotic and tyrannical.
Therefore, may I suggest for your education: Federalist #46 (and if you have any other misconceptions about the US Constitution or Bill of Rights, the other 85 aren’t bad either).
The massive purchasing of personal firearms over the last six years is not because of a sudden duck invasion, or increase in crime. Crime has decreased, and the ducks haven’t killed anybody yet. It is a sudden, nationwide fear of a coming tyranny that has supercharged gun purchases.
I am tired of liberal assclowns trying to infringe upon my right to keep and bear arms! Guns are a tool the man who misused a tool is the one to blame not the tool! Do you blame the hammer when you hit your thumb no so until you learn this simple lesson you are not going to convince me and millions like me that guns kill !