How much does it money does it cost us to keep having the Supreme Court of Ohio tell Toledo to read the Bill of Rights??
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/6/2006/2006-ohio-4638.pdf
Whether you like guns or not, is it not insane that Toledo keeps passing gun control laws that create such huge problems?
Why won't they just read the Bill of Rights? They can't pass a law that diminishes those protections, whether they like them or not.
The very same people who championed the statewide smoker ban , saying "We Must have a level playing field rather than a patchwork of local laws" ...are NOW saying, where guns are concerned-"HOME RULE! We must respect HOME RULE! Filthy hypocrite bastards!
They twist everything in order to justify their socialist elitist prejudices/wants.
----------------------
BRING THE TROOPS HOME-NOW!
Why should one more drop of our soldiers blood be spilled on foreign soil? Why fight/die for 'freedom' anymore when our citizens are pissing it away at the voting booth?
Does anybody know any way to find out how much the city spent to prosecute this guy and then how much the appeal cost?
How much did Beatty spend in legal fees? Was he arrested? Jailed - ?
The pdf attached is a decision from an appeals court.
The appellant Mr. Beady lost his appeal as the Appeals court affirmed the Trial Court ruling.
The Supreme Court of Ohio did not rule on the matter. Further an Appeals Court does not deal with the facts of the case, it deals with the application of the law to the case and the questions raised by the parties.
So, Mr. Beady will now have to appeal the findings to the Supreme Court if he wishes and the Toledo rule still stands.
http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog
from the Supreme Court of Ohio, it is an appellate decision. ??
from the 6th Appellate District of the Supreme Court of Ohio.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_supreme_court
Generally, the state supreme court is exclusively for hearing appeals of legal issues. It does not do any finding of facts, and thus holds no trials. In the rare case where the trial court made an egregious error in its finding of facts, the state supreme court will remand to the trial court for a new trial. This responsibility of correcting the errors of inferior courts has resulted in a variety of names for state supreme courts.
You said "The appellant Mr. Beady lost his appeal as the Appeals court affirmed the Trial Court ruling."
If you read the last paragraphs of the decision you will see that the appellant won the appeal.
The last line reads, 'Accordingly, I would reverse the judgment of the trial court and find the appellants assignment of error well taken'.
At the top of the Appellate Court ruling it states which court issued the ruling.
An Appellate court of Lucas County.
"If you read the last paragraphs of the decision you will see that the appellant won the appeal."
What you are referring to is the dissenting judge's opinion.
The paragraph you cite is the opinion of one judge and not the ruling.
The courts ruling is thusly;
I apologize, I saw the decision notation and this is the first time I've seen the dissent attached to the decision. I went to the end of the document -
I had assumed (which makes an a$$ -- you know this one :-) I read the City of Clyde v. Ohioans for Concealed Carry S-06-039
which states in part:
pg3., P4 The trial court granted summery judgment for appellees (City of Clyde) on the controlling precedent of Beatty. However, by consent of the parties, the trial court continued the temporary injunction and entered a stay of its order pending appeal. Thus, Ordinance 2004-41 has remained unenforced.
P5 Appellants filed a timely notice of appeal and has raised the following assignments of error:
P6 "A. The trial court erred in holding that R.C 2923.126 is not a general law.
P7 "B. The trial court erred in holding that Ohio's concealed carry law does not preempt Clyde codified ordinance 2004-41
P8. On December 12,2006, while this appeal was pending, the Ohio Legislature passed H.B. 347 over Governor Taft's veto. The bill affects 31 different statutes, most of which comprise the concealed carry laws. The bill also added R.C. 9.68 which states in pertinent part:
P9 "(A) The individual right to keep and bear arms, being a fundamental individual right that predates the United States Constitution and Ohio Constitution, and being a constitutionally protected right in every part of Ohio, the general assembly finds the need to provide uniform laws throughout the state regulating the ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transport, storage, carrying, sale, or other transfer of firearms, their components, and their ammunition. 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, store, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition.
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/6/2007/2007-ohio-1733.pdf
I read this reference to the Toledo Beatty case, and then the dissension.
So, after all this - does this mean that Beatty was not overturned for the above reasons?
The way that I found it easiet to read an appelate court opinion is to start from the bottom up.
The court ruled based on the claims as present by Beatty and it is there in the ruling in the pdf.
The way I read the affirmation is that Beatty was not deprived of any right to possess a weapon as a general statement but he was not allowed to carry the weapon to a public park in Toledo and the Home Rule did not conflict with the State Law in place.
http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog
a right to bear arms which predates even the Constitution - and basically said no gun controls could be brought. So, I haven't the ability to research here now - but wouldn't that have overturned Beatty?
This is what the Appellate court said in the Clyde decision - so ya' lost me somewhere here.
P9 "(A) The individual right to keep and bear arms, being a fundamental individual right that predates the United States Constitution and Ohio Constitution, and being a constitutionally protected right in every part of Ohio, the general assembly finds the need to provide uniform laws throughout the state regulating the ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transport, storage, carrying, sale, or other transfer of firearms, their components, and their ammunition. 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, store, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition
This wasn't my invention - the above is what the 6th Appellate Court said, while quoting the Beatty case in its' decision. I think you are talking about something else maybe?
Again, I post the link to this decision. Let me know if you review it - otherwise our discussing it doesn't make very much sense.
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/6/2007/2007-ohio-1733.pdf
Taking the statement by the court is not indicative of the decision of the court, it is discussion.
When we look at this;
" {
"So what does this mean for Beatty? Will he have to appeal to the Sup. Court or is his fight now finished?"
That would be the next move. Both the trial court and appeals court have ruled against the case, so the next court is the Ohio Supreme court.
http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog
The Appellate court did not remand the case, nor is the word remand used in the decision.
The court affirmed the lower courts ruling or agreed with the trial court.
"The last line reads, 'Accordingly, I would reverse the judgment of the trial court and find the appellants assignment of error well taken'."
The court does not refer to itself as I, it refers to itself as the court.
"Bruce Beatty challenged the Toldeo, OH ban on carrying firearms in a public park by holding a much publicized "birthday party" to celebrate the one year anniversary of the Ohio CHL law. After being ticketed, Beatty fought the ticket in court and lost at the municipal and appellate levels. After a very poor decision by the Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals ruled that Ohio's CHL law is not a general law (and would be subject to being overruled by any home rule municipality), OFCC teamed up with Beatty to appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court. "
http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog
"a right to bear arms which predates even the Constitution - and basically said no gun controls could be brought. So, I haven't the ability to research here now - but wouldn't that have overturned Beatty?"
The constitutionality of the right to bear arms was not present in the Trial Court nor the Appeals Court.
Beatty disputed the City of Toledo's action to ban guns at playgrounds. Beatty sued and disputed the Home Rule and the Trial and Appellate court ruled against him.
This is action in State Court's remember.
http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog
So what does this mean for Beatty? Will he have to appeal to the Sup. Court or is his fight now finished?
I will say I've studied ways to combat government law. And under the Constitutional Paradigm of confronting government Beatty is covered well. So morally what Beatty did can be viewed as just by a moral perspective. Just thought man on here would want to know.
MikeyA