Cincinnati/SW Ohio Open Carry/Firearm Education Walk

As much a I wish that my schedule could allow it, I cannot attend -something that I have known for a while. I am sure that I speak for many others when I sincerely thank you for your time, money, energy, and effort with this walk. I wish you the best success.

sd790 said:

As much a I wish that my schedule could allow it, I cannot attend -something that I have known for a while. I am sure that I speak for many others when I sincerely thank you for your time, money, energy, and effort with this walk. I wish you the best success.

Click to expand...

Thank you kindly sir or madam.

BB62 said:

Thank you kindly sir or madam.

Click to expand...

sd790 is a sir, at least that's what his wife told me.

You do what you can, when you can, and wish everyone else the best of luck.

BTW, sd790...Hilliard is having a second reading for their ordinance to amend their 'no guns in parks' rule on Monday (4/14/14). Warm bodies always appreciated! LIVE warm bodies...to fill the chairs in the council chambers...that's what I meant!!

(See? If you can't make it to ONE event, we'll just find another!)

Briefly put, yesterday's OC walk around and ON the University of Cincinnati campus went just fine, without a hitch. About 70 total participants.

Brian D. said:

Briefly put, yesterday's OC walk around and ON the University of Cincinnati campus went just fine, without a hitch. About 70 total participants.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the post, Brian. It reminded me to post my summary.

As posted on Facebook:

I want to thank everyone from the bottom of my heart for attending. The group of 67 men, women, and children was FANTASTIC, and it included 13 UC students!!

(** UC students make sure you read the note at the bottom of this post **)

The interactions with members of the public were PHENOMENAL and numerous - people of different ages, races, and religious beliefs asked questions of the participants, and the participants engaged them in conversations of various lengths. People even talked to Chris Beckman for a half an hour AFTER the walk!

My favorite encounter happened as we were returning from lunch - a women pulled her car into a driveway right in front of part of the group, blocking the group's progress back to the rally point, and essentially said "What the hell is this all about?" and then said she was scared of guns (while surrounded by about 20 people with guns). Carolyn Robey and Julie Smith Johnson, among others, talked with her and her boyfriend for a good 10 minutes, concluding with contact information being given.

At least one person drove & carpooled 4 hours in one direction, another drove from Lima (2 hours), two from Indianapolis (2 hours), and at least 6 from around Columbus (~2 hours) to come. If I've missed your long drive, please note it. THANK YOU so much for making the trip.

I also want to express my deep appreciation to the leaders, members and friends of Central Ohio Carry, Southwest Ohio Carry, and Ohio Carry for being the first people to recommend this walk, and for coming. From these groups, as best as I can remember names, those people are: Chuck LaRosa, Paɗɗy Mac Uidɦiɾ, Carolyn Robey, Dave Noice, and Brett Anthony.

Thanks also to Cincy Brian, Joe Beresford, Hans Oak, oh my, I can never remember everyone, so...

** I know there are others whose names I haven't retained, so please remind me and PLEASE FRIEND ME if you haven't already. **

FOOD - my deep appreciation to the folks at Hwy 55 U Square, 140 W. McMillan, Cincinnati, and DiBella's Subs, 265 Calhoun St., Cincinnati for their warm welcome and GREAT food. (if anyone can figure out how to link them, please do) Also, although those two restaurants had sufficient capacity, thanks to Penn Station, 208 W. McMillan for being willing to serve participants lunch.

There have been LOTS of requests among the participants, the merchants, and the people we passed by to do this kind of thing again. Stay tuned!

PLEASE post your comments about the walk, what you thought it would be like, what it was like, and your photos.

Oh, one more thing - Ben Jung's girlfriend wins the prize for the longest long arm possessed by the shortest person. (Thanks for bringing her, Ben!)


ONE LAST THING for UC students: the administration, through the UC legal department, made it clear that open carry on campus *for this event* was fine... BUT, the student code of conduct has not been altered *yet* so I DO NOT suggest open carrying on campus until that happens!

BB62:

Yes, that was interesting......the lady that pulled into the driveway in front of us........she whipped it right in there. I was one of the ones who were standing right there when she pulled into the drive.......think there were three of us who were just about to step acrost the drive when she cut us off:lol:. And she didn't waste any time gettin' out of her car! Wish one of us would have taken pics. or, better yet, a video of that!

And I was the one who drove about 2+ hours and carpooled another 2 hrs, one way. Good job in organizing that walk........it was worth the drive.

3FULLMAGS+1 said:

BB62:

Yes, that was interesting......the lady that pulled into the driveway in front of us........she whipped it right in there. I was one of the ones who were standing right there when she pulled into the drive.......think there were three of us who were just about to step acrost the drive when she cut us off:lol:. And she didn't waste any time gettin' out of her car! Wish one of us would have taken pics. or, better yet, a video of that!

And I was the one who drove about 2+ hours and carpooled another 2 hrs, one way. Good job in organizing that walk........it was worth the drive.

Click to expand...

THANK YOU for making the drive 3FM+1! I'm so glad you had a good time.

The lady was a trip! I agree, a video would have been classic!


The bad news is that we failed : http://www.newsrecord.org/news/camp...cle_42c3f31e-c367-11e3-acd1-001a4bcf6878.html

UC student newspaper "The News Record" headline: "Group fails to educate UC community on firearm rights"

"Nearly 70 people armed with hunting rifles, handguns and assault weapons strolled through the University of Cincinnati’s main campus Saturday. Their mission: inform the public about Ohio’s firearm laws. The problem: very few of the dozens of students and other bystanders showed the slightest hint of curiosity..."

Okay, so we failed miserably, right? :uhoh: Well, *I* clearly failed media 101: "Keep your mouth closed until you know your experience is representative", but clearly WE didn't fail.

We made history, WE ultimately had LOTS of conversations with students, customers and owners of businesses, and the only police interest in our presence was at the rally point.

Epic fail... NOT!

I learned something and plenty of other people did too. UC's "Safety Notice" no doubt was a prime cause of students' nonchalance.

It was the first, but it no doubt won't be the last walk.

Bottom line for me: It's all good.

Again, my sincere thanks to you and to everyone else for being there!

3FULLMAGS+1 said:

...

And I was the one who drove about 2+ hours and carpooled another 2 hrs, one way. Good job in organizing that walk........it was worth the drive.

Click to expand...

I told you that if you survived the carpool, you'd have fun !!

:monkey

Obvious question from this.

So this seems like an obvious connection to make after this weekend's events. Was the administration and local law enforcement only making an exception for this event? Or is it something that will be ongoing?

m_roach said:

So this seems like an obvious connection to make after this weekend's events. Was the administration and local law enforcement only making an exception for this event? Or is it something that will be ongoing?

Click to expand...

What kind of exception are you referring to? Open carry is legal in Ohio. Open carry on campus is legal, but discouraged by the student code of conduct, which indicates that sanctions will be forthcoming for various things related to weapons.

Ongoing? We'll see.

m_roach said:

So this seems like an obvious connection to make after this weekend's events. Was the administration and local law enforcement only making an exception for this event? Or is it something that will be ongoing?

Click to expand...

Also, welcome to the forum!

As a public school, any policy against students possessing firearms should not, as per R.C. 9.68, apply outside of any university buildings.

This has not been tested in a court of law, and we don't want any student to get into trouble UNKNOWINGLY.

MyWifeSaidYes said:

As a public school, any policy against students possessing firearms should not, as per R.C. 9.68, apply outside of any university buildings.

This has not been tested in a court of law ...

Click to expand...

Before you go pouring out too much of that IANAL KoolAid, you may wish to research what the courts of law have actually said ...

• "[W]hen a student enrolls in a college or university, pays his or her tuition and fees, and attends the school, the resulting relationship is construed as contractual in nature." Behrend v. State (1977), 55 Ohio App. 2d 135, 138; Bleicher v. Univ. of Cincinnati College of Med. (1992), 78 Ohio App.3d 302, 308; Mahalati v. Ohio State University, 2007-Ohio-3856, at ¶11.
  
• "In addressing the issue of whether such contract has been breached, the trier of fact appropriately looks to the terms of the contract as found in the college guidelines supplied to students." Bleicher, supra, at 308.
  
• "The terms of the contract between the university and its student are generally found in the college catalog and handbooks applied to students." Mahalati, supra, at ¶11.

Yeah, that means the Code of Student Conduct. And note that all of those cases involve state universities. R.C. 9.68 does not affect contractual provisions.

Werz said:

Before you go pouring out too much of that IANAL KoolAid, you may wish to research what the courts of law have actually said ...

• "[W]hen a student enrolls in a college or university, pays his or her tuition and fees, and attends the school, the resulting relationship is construed as contractual in nature." Behrend v. State (1977), 55 Ohio App. 2d 135, 138; Bleicher v. Univ. of Cincinnati College of Med. (1992), 78 Ohio App.3d 302, 308; Mahalati v. Ohio State University, 2007-Ohio-3856, at ¶11.
  
• "In addressing the issue of whether such contract has been breached, the trier of fact appropriately looks to the terms of the contract as found in the college guidelines supplied to students." Bleicher, supra, at 308.
  
• "The terms of the contract between the university and its student are generally found in the college catalog and handbooks applied to students." Mahalati, supra, at ¶11.

Yeah, that means the Code of Student Conduct. And note that all of those cases involve state universities. R.C. 9.68 does not affect contractual provisions.

Click to expand...

But 9.68 states...

Except as specifically provided by the United States Constitution, Ohio Constitution, state law, or federal law, a person, without further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process, may own, possess, purchase, sell, transfer, transport, store, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition.

And then 3345.011 states...

State university" means a public institution of higher education which is a body politic and corporate. Each of the following institutions of higher education shall be recognized as a state university: university of Akron, Bowling Green state university, Central state university, university of Cincinnati, Cleveland state university, Kent state university, Miami university, Ohio university, Ohio state university, Shawnee state university, university of Toledo, Wright state university, and Youngstown state university.

Notice that it says they are a body politic which means they are a government entity themselves and therefore cannot create any firearm laws themselves. There's no authority in the ORC that gives them the right to restrict firearms on campus besides concealed carry which the ORC mandates.

This is what Mike Newbern's lawsuit is all about. And well we know how fast they move.

I like KoolAid.

JediSkipdogg said:

But 9.68 states...

Except as specifically provided by the United States Constitution, Ohio Constitution, state law, or federal law, a person, without further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process, may own, possess, purchase, sell, transfer, transport, store, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition.

And then 3345.011 states...

State university" means a public institution of higher education which is a body politic and corporate. Each of the following institutions of higher education shall be recognized as a state university: university of Akron, Bowling Green state university, Central state university, university of Cincinnati, Cleveland state university, Kent state university, Miami university, Ohio university, Ohio state university, Shawnee state university, university of Toledo, Wright state university, and Youngstown state university.

Notice that it says they are a body politic which means they are a government entity themselves and therefore cannot create any firearm laws themselves. There's no authority in the ORC that gives them the right to restrict firearms on campus besides concealed carry which the ORC mandates.

This is what Mike Newbern's lawsuit is all about. And well we know how fast they move.

Click to expand...

More importantly IMHO is that 9.68 states "In addition to any other relief provided, the court shall award costs and reasonable attorney fees to any person, group, or entity that prevails in a challenge to an ordinance, rule, or regulation as being in conflict with this section." Maybe someone can explain to me why the student conduct codes are not rules or regulations.

JediSkipdogg said:

This is what Mike Newbern's lawsuit is all about. And well we know how fast they move.

Click to expand...

Mike told me three years ago about this lawsuit he was going to file. Now you tell me the lawsuit was filed. Where is this lawsuit? I would love to read it.

JediSkipdogg said:

But 9.68 states...

And then 3345.011 states...

Click to expand...

I'm fully aware of what those statutes state. I'm also aware that universities, whether state or private, are engaged in commerce on a contractual basis with students who enroll there. The relationship is not the same as with other governmental entities, and a contractual relationship can require a waiver of certain legal rights.

State universities create a paradigm far removed from one where you can claim the protection of R.C. 9.68 with a high level of confidence. And if you read the case law for a while, you'll learn they're different creatures in other regards.

Werz said:

I'm fully aware of what those statutes state. I'm also aware that universities, whether state or private, are engaged in commerce on a contractual basis with students who enroll there. The relationship is not the same as with other governmental entities, and a contractual relationship can require a waiver of certain legal rights.

State universities create a paradigm far removed from one where you can claim the protection of R.C. 9.68 with a high level of confidence. And if you read the case law for a while, you'll learn they're different creatures in other regards.

Click to expand...

Maybe you should tell Mike Newbern (head of the Ohio branch of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus - SCCC) that his long-promised suit is going to go nowhere, then. :uhoh:

BB62 said:

Maybe you should tell Mike Newbern (head of the Ohio branch of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus - SCCC) that his long-promised suit is going to go nowhere, then. :uhoh:

Click to expand...

Not necessarily so. It's just more complicated than most folks think.

For instance, a procedural matter: If Ohio State University was to be sued under R.C. 9.68 for the firearms provision in their student code of conduct, where would that lawsuit be filed?

Werz said:

Not necessarily so. It's just more complicated than most folks think.

For instance, a procedural matter: If Ohio State University was to be sued under R.C. 9.68 for the firearms provision in their student code of conduct, where would that lawsuit be filed?

Click to expand...

You made the statement above that "...R.C. 9.68 does not affect contractual provisions."

You've essentially responded stating how complicated a lawsuit was.

I said "More importantly IMHO is that 9.68 states "In addition to any other relief provided, the court shall award costs and reasonable attorney fees to any person, group, or entity that prevails in a challenge to an ordinance, rule, or regulation as being in conflict with this section." Maybe someone can explain to me why the student conduct codes are not rules or regulations."

So let me ask you directly: "Maybe someone can explain to me why the student conduct codes are not rules or regulations?"

Or, a similar question: What gives OSU or any other public university the right to can construct a contract, if that's what it is, that violates statutory rights, without violating 9.68?