facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Ohio lawmakers vote to allow guns in bars, arenas



Published: Wed, June 15, 2011 @ 4:55 p.m.

COLUMBUS (AP) — Ohio lawmakers have passed a proposal to allow people with concealed-carry permits to take their firearms into many facilities where alcohol is served and consumed, as long as they don’t drink.

The Republican-led Ohio House voted 55-39 in favor of the change, and the GOP-led Senate concurred with a vote of 25-7 today.

First-term Republican Gov. John Kasich has supported the idea, though his spokesman said Kasich wanted to see details of the final version before deciding whether to sign it.

Supporters say the measure is about allowing people who legally have concealed weapons to carry the firearms into restaurants that happen to serve alcohol, instead of leaving them behind in a vehicle. Opponents say it will lead to a dangerous mix of booze and firearms.


Comments

1Wapiti(139 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

How stupid. Where will the first shots be fired?
Typical of lying Kasich.

Suggest removal:

2cambridge(3013 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

What could go wrong?

Suggest removal:

3Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

This is insane,..

Where I'm no fan of neither Strickland nor Kasich. I'd believe that under Strickland this nonsense wouldn't be voted into law. Where to defend ones person, family and possessions aren't just fine but condoned and even advocated. However, to allow weapons in eateries, bars and arenas is absolutely maniacal.

This is as idiotic and counter productive as that non smoking mandate they forced on businesses and patrons. Where it's fine to forbade such in schools, libraries, hospitals, clinics, restaurants, grocery stores and service stations. With a levity to even allow proprietors to invoke it at their establishments if they choose. The non smokers will display their tolerance or intolerance and it'll effect his / her business.

However, that kind of sane and sensible implementation didn't happen either. There was no allowance for the business owner to decide if the measure works for them or not. That mindless measure was pushed through and forced business closures and made law violators out of honest people,..

Now with this over the top ovation of Ohio " guess-istrators " orchestrating mass catastrophe. One can now only wonder when the spate of shootings will start. It's without question not only will those businesses suffer a decline in patronage.

But one can already foretell that many innocent adults and children. Will get struck and slain by gunfire in various venues via this legislative lunacy,.. it's indefensible.

There was a time when Ohio was a great State. However, now it's became everything it didn't used to be. It's not so much the people as it is the people allowing loose hinged wing nut legislators and judicial jackals to have ruined a and or thee gem of the Midwest.

The legislators in Ohio are clearly a pack consisting of a volatile mixture. Composed of absolute basket cases that serve as social drunks, midlife meth monkeys, closet crackheads and seniors in varied stages of senility. Which is unquestionable for them to have presented the legislative record that they have,.. what a waste of tax dollars and squandering of states assets.

Question,.. Does and or can anybody see and or explain this any differently?

Suggest removal:

4BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Nunya, I'll give ya my two cents but you'll just toss it in the take a penny cup at your local gas station. I'd be willing to bet you all that second hand smoke killed more people than any legal conceal carry in a bar. The only thing the antigun people want to do is take away guns from the innocent. Do you really think that the bad guys are slapping five saying "Yes! We can finally carry a gun in a bar and cause mayhem!" News flash, those people already carry guns into bars.

The law states that you cannot carry and consume even a drop of alcohol. It's pretty clear. Your conceal carry is null and void and you go to jail.

And as for people thinking we are going back to the wild west? Maybe we should. I'd bet we find out that horse accidents kill far less than car accidents. It'd probably be better for the environment. I'm sure you've never had a drink at a bar and then drove home. Come to think of it, you can actually drink and drive as long as you below legal limit. There isn't a limit on a gun but you can take a 3500 pound car and take it to the streets. But by now everyone is saying I'm one of those crazy nut jobs, right? Don't fear the good guys. Fear the bad guys. They're the ones that already carry ILLEGALLY and drink and drive beyond control ILLEGALLY.

If you all really want to see a better Ohio and U.S.A. then start by not buying things made in China and help get the jobs back in Ohio. Jobs aren't being lost in bars because they can't smoke. It's because people don't have the extra cash to blow on beer and cigarettes that have been taxed to death.

Suggest removal:

5jupiter(116 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Nothing but good guv'nor john and company trying to pander to the gun nut crowd...in an attempt to garner support for what is turning out to be a failing administration. I believe the good guv'nor's approval rating is somewhat near the "most hated governor" in the nation....
What all these big damn gun nuts fail, fail, fail to realize is that "Just because you brought it...DON'T MEAN YOU GET TO KEEP IT!"
I would be all for CCW if one had to pass a physical fitness test as well.
Should make for interesting, albeit tragic video footage: Fat, out of shape gun nut is rag dolled by a younger, angrier, muscular assailant....then shot with his own gun.
....just because what I am saying hurts your ego does not make it true.

Suggest removal:

6jupiter(116 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

sorry..just because what I am saying hurts your ego does not make it FALSE....meant to say "false." Now run along and grab yo' gat!

Suggest removal:

7Benjii(26 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

As usual, the anti-Republican gang is using this as a means of smearing the Governor, again. Since the onset of CC law, how many time have you read, heard or seen a legal permit holder breaking the law with a gun? The answer....NEVER. This is just more anit-gun, anti-Republican crap. We are the most depressed, backward area in the country, and we continue to cling to our love for the Democrats. Why don't you guys run Bob Hagan for President. He would make sure to get in front of every camera withing a 50 mile radius. His politics would make the Mahoning Valley proud again. Get off this stupid subject and deal with a country that has been driven to the edge of financial colapse by our esteemed President.

Suggest removal:

8Stan(9923 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

The HOODRATS selling drugs should be the only ones going into a bar armed . Others have no need for firearms .

Suggest removal:

9VindyPost(436 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

"Ohio lawmakers have passed a proposal to allow people with concealed-carry permits to take their firearms into many facilities where alcohol is served and consumed, as long as they don’t drink."

***********************************************************************

This is a legislature that is OUT OF CONTROL--or let's get them out of control, fast, very fast!

Why in the world does one need their gun to go out to dinner for an hour? Why does one need their gun at an arena? (unless a target shooting expo?) Why does one need their gun or weapon at a lounge? This promotes a self-defense society. Boy, the lawyers love this---everyone tries to prove self-defense on outings now! Frankly, Don't Go and surround yourself at bars, venues when you have to leave the house and pack-up your gun! Apparently one would be "looking for trouble". This is only creating unfortunate disaster amongst the innocent and permitting hostility in the environment!

I must add, (and this is not for the responsible ones)-- I feel the IRRESPONSIBLE violent gun handlers don't need a drink in the establishments---they are already either corked up or drugged up in the first place.

It used to be... grab your keys, wallet and go out to socialize...GOV KASICK says: let's go out to socialize AND BRING YOUR WEAPON! He's Dysfunctional! Is this the "better good" for society and our local communities? Our government officials ban weapons and guns from airlines and have extensive search and pat-downs...but permit firearms everyday at establishments and arenas?! Go figure...

Kasick got to go ---he's nuts, he's half loopy himself to allow such.
......nodding.....nodding.....

Suggest removal:

10AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

This law is ridiculous. I see no need to have guns in a bar. I see no need to have a gun at a football-baseball game.

People with weapons KILL.
I know, not all people with weapons kill. But why take the unnecessary chances. Bar fight breaks out, gun falls on floor, someone picks up gun and starts shooting. Not a pretty picture.

Suggest removal:

11Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@ BLACKECK

Lets do this,..

I've stated my perspectives and where I vehemently disagree with your synopsis. In a display of respect for our indifference in regards to perspective. Before I really redress yours. Allow me to ask,.. Do you know whats behind all this?

See I ask that because I'm not sure that you do. However, I'm not contending you don't. Hence you may and you've possibly just not conveyed that in what you stated. So I'd like to hear what you really think it is.

See in contrast to what you're trying to contend. Fact is nobody's campaigning for disarming any citizen with lawful gun possession / ownership. To include where I don't drink I don't hold responsible drinking against those who do,.. trust me I'd be among the first to oppose that.

I also don't smoke but again it's legal and thus those other adults who do are recognized as being well within their legal rights. To include I have no use for narcotics as I know they're only counter productive deliminators,.. nothing good comes from any of those substances.

So no I'm not going to call you a nut job nor any other disparaging term just because we see this differently. See you've expressed your opinion and although I disagree. I still appreciate you exposing me / us to a differing mindset. Hence, in that sense of mutual respect there's quiet a bit I'd love to share with you to clarify a number of things.

See beyond those philosophical differences. I actually sense what we genuinely have in common. Is a mutual disgust for what wayward wing nut legislators and the jackals in the state judiciary has done to Ohio,.. did you ever think it's get this haplessly horrid?

So see before I break this congruent science down to you. Which in respecting that this is no private conversation. I feel it's only fair, prudent, just and beneficial. To allow the populous to be enlightened by being able to distinguish the accuracy that one of us will provide them in our exchange of perspectives.

So I'll ask,.. Do you really feel that allowing / promoting patrons. To start toting guns in diners, restaurants, eateries, bars, dance halls and entertainment events. Is a genuine matter of required defense or a social benefit, or even an economic aid, enhancement and or pillar?

Suggest removal:

12ttup1rd(27 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

listen IDIOTS, this law is about good, honest, law abiding citizens protecting themselves. First you have to pass a background test to recieve your permit, they're not going to give a criminal with a record a permit. I just want to be able to go to a bar and listen to a band and be able to walk back to my car without being robbed. HAVE YOU READ THE PAPERS LATELY, where can you go that your safe anymore? ALL I WANT TO DO IS DEFEND MYSELF and not give in to these idiot ghetto thugs....

Suggest removal:

13author50(1121 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Lets see, you cant smoke in a bar, but you can carry a gun in one - makes sense to me!

Suggest removal:

14ts1227(137 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

ttup1rd,
A Republican has now proposed a bill that would let anyone that "qualifies for a permit" under the current rules be able to carry a weapon without actually obtaining said permit (it was in today's Columbus Dispatch). It also would permit firearms in colleges, churches, child-care centers and government buildings. No training classes, no anything. Just because people pass a background check doesn't mean they are completely capable, yet it's going to shape up that way at this rate.

Suggest removal:

15Shanty(18 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

The only ones that comment on this new law are the ones that oppose guns. They are the same ones that cried these same stories when Ohio was trying to pass the concealed carry law. All of the horror stories they predicted came to be unfounded and will turn out the same way if this law passes. It doesn't matter what gun law was trying to be passed these anti-gun radicals would cry the same story.

Suggest removal:

16Wapiti(139 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

This law is as useless as the No Smoking law. All a Business need do is place a sign in their establishment stating...NO CONCEAL CARRY ALLOWED and that puts an end to all the bs. And YES I do own many guns. And I know how to use them.

Suggest removal:

17cambridge(3013 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

I can't imagine being afraid to leave the house without a gun. It's just the teabagger/republicans pandering for the coward vote.

Suggest removal:

18BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

ts1227, what you said a Columbus newspaper said doesn't make alot of sense. I hate second hand information. Give us a link to that exact story and then I will comment. I know youwere talking to ttup1rd but the rest of us see it too and until I know the exact part of that story then I would like to either say that one part of the story shouldn't be or correct you on what you may have misread. Maybe you didn't misread it. I need to know and then I will comment.

Suggest removal:

19AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Guns are allowerd in bars.
Smoking is not allowed in bars.

How about a smoking gun?

Suggest removal:

20BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@ Jupiter. What the ?

@ another average citizen. The difference between a sporting event and a bar/ bar and grille is that you don't get patted down when you walk into Applebees. I believe in ccw and some gun control. I'm kind of the odd ball because there are others I know that believe you shouldn't have to get a CCW period. It's a great stipulation to me.

@ Nunya. I can't figure out if you are giving compliments or kicks to the groin. Your sentences I think have points but I'm not sure what except that we agree to disagree and you like seeing my perspective because I'm not lambasting everyone.

@ttup1rd. Calling the antigun people idiots is a bit harsh. They have their opinions and we have ours.

@samlam. Let's ban steak knives at Apple Bees and other places since it seems like alcohol and emotions lead to death on more than just a rare isolated incident. The servers can cut all of our steaks up for us so noone is put in danger.

To the antigunners. It's funny that you call progun people scared for wanting to carry a gun to protect themselves yet you sound just as scared that people who haven't been commited of a crime and took a class for safety and use of guns are about to be able to carry in a bar and start shooting up the joint. The reality is the bad guy that is going to go off in a bar is the one already carrying illegally if he were in a bar or at your local Walmart. As a matter of fact most of you probably text and talk while driving and that is alot more dangerous than someone who has never had trouble with the law carrying a gun legally for their own personal protection and the protection of their family.

It's ok though. I would still be there protecting you if ever the bad guy wanted to make you the victim. Please understand that most of us CCW people want nothing but peace and to keep our guns in the holsters they sit in. It isn't there for show (it's concealed) and it isn't there for intimidation and emotional release. It's like locks on doors. Locks on doors are for the innocent people. The bad guys break the glass in and turn the knob on the inside.

Suggest removal:

21eyemhip(4 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

I have a CCW. Although I don't have a need to carry into a bar, I also know that it does NOT mean we will have shootouts. You people with your opinions are doing your best to present them as fact. When will you ever quit shouting that the sky is falling? Instead of sitting back on your so-called morals, why don't you come out to the range, meet some folks who like to shoot. OMG, maybe even try it yourself! You will find that we are good citizens, people and Americans. For those of you who decide to get to know some of us who enjoy hunting and/or target shooting as well as self defense you will discover that I'm right. For the rest of you,,well you just don't want to hear the facts because your mind is already made up. Good luck with that self rightous indulgance that you enjoy so much.

Suggest removal:

22ts1227(137 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

BLACKECK,
Most sites block links to other sites (especially other newspapers) in their comments, so I left it out for that purpose. I'll try to post it, it may or may not work.

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/...

Suggest removal:

23VINDYAK(1799 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

This is all about leveling the playing field. The felons and thugs carry knives and guns everywhere so they have an advantage over you, the non-carrying citizen.

Certainly, they may not cater to all the same bar or restaurants as you do, but they certainly do prowl the streets and parking lots on your way to your favorite establishment.

One of the reasons for passage of this bill is to allow CCW people to carry their protection with them when going to the establishment as well as exiting the establishment. Parking lots have become easy pickings for thugs and knowing an establishment bans patrons from carrying makes the parking lots and streets of those establishments a safe place to set up shop.

One issue that CCW people have is having to leave their protection at home because the establishment they are going to does not allow them to carry their protection into the establishment. This nullifies the intended effect of CCW, which is to allow trained citizens to carry firearms for their protection and the protection of others in their vicinity.

In today's economy with reduced police protection we must level the field, or better yet, increase the advantage to the citizen and not the felon, so I see this new revision to the CCW law as a positive effect for us all.

Suggest removal:

24AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Blackeck, in the new law there is no difference between a bar and sporting event. They may get padded down only to find a hidden weapon, which will be legal at the game.

Suggest removal:

25BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

another average citizen. I didn't clarify things in my statement to you. It was in my head but not my post. I did say I am a different type of conceal carry type. Sporting events I don't believe you should be able to bring a gun into because of the reason of pat downs and because when you usually walk out there are throngs of people that deter bad guys.

Some of these places like schools and sporting events will be taken care of with a simple no guns allowed sign in the front of their establishment. That I am aware of that is not being taken away from the person that owns the building. If anyone is afraid of being shot by an emotional drunk carrying lawfully (then unlawfully by taking one taste of the alcohol) then they can look at the place they frequent's front door and see if there are no gun signs. If there aren't then you have the choice to go somewhere else that does so that you feel snug as a bug. By the way, Walmart has no such sign in their establishment. Now what? Let the blood curdling screams begin now. Is there nowhere we can be safe from law abiding ccw citizens?

Suggest removal:

26Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@ BLACKECK

I know I have a penchant for humorously deadpanning those incessant ideologues that I vehemently disagree with. But I mean no offense and only good willed humor in stating that I gleaned your sense of pessimism. Was merely because you already knew you couldn't defend any oppositional view in regards to what I stated.

Here's some things for you to think about. Or possibly be able to answer with greater enlightenment for us whom just can't make plausible sense of such a measure,.. aside from citing it as legislatively criminal.

PREFACE:

Ok,.. so now they've orchestrated law where CCW carriers are allowed to tote their sidearms in public places. Places that not just serve the general public that includes children. But even includes venues that serve the inebriant called alcohol.

Which by chemical composition and characteristic effect. Alcohol induces a volatility that serves as the exact opposite of sodium pentathol or Nitrous oxide in effect. Hence it's more than mere conclusive medical study that has concluded bad judgment and confrontational behavior. Isn't at all abnormal antics displayed by those under the influence of alcohol..

DEDUCING PROBABLE CAUSE:

Why?,.. mind you there's been no spate of any outbreak of neither deadly nor superficially scathing food fights. Nor has there been any influx of carry out nor dine or drink on premises menu or drink thefts. Nor has there been any proprietors railing, pleading nor requesting.

For neither the public assistance in the form of Sam Sausage head to come in to play the shootist. Nor give John boy a need to get jumpy or Leroy to come lay any patrons out or have Cletus or Cornelius to kill anybody waging complaints at the cash bar,.. nope.

For that fact nor are we aware of any proprietors nor patrons. Assailing such requests for quick draw Cassandra, double barreled Donna, or fast fingered Freddy nor Freda to fire their rounds all up in the joint for any reason.

Suggest removal:

27Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

ECONOMICALLY SUPPORTIVE?

Mind you can you imagine the redaction's, revocations and re-writing and the increase of bonds and premiums. That those insuring underwriters of policies for those establishments this will cause for proprietors?,.. think more denial of coverage revocations than mere spiked cost increase for the establishment owner here.

How many people do you know that serve as a good paying patron that goes to bars not to drink? I mean does he or she eat the kitchen bare? Or do they charitably buy drinks for various other patrons as their idea of enjoying the bar, pub atmosphere?,... I saw that individual is few and far between.

For that fact how many people do you know that goes to get a burger or takes their family out for a platter of food or take in a event. That would feel comfortable not knowing what clown is roaming around the arena. That's just a snarky look, dis-cordial nudge or a verbal exchange from pulling a weapon and aiming at somebody they have an indifference with and may be a horrible shot? ,.. hey it was just a tragic accident huh?

VALIDATION BY DELIBERATION:

So what reason, good, public or establishment service, purpose or benefit. Will infusing armed patrons in places where entertainment is being enjoyed. Or where money is being exchanged and food and alcohol are being served?

Is it intended to diminish or escalate bar fights? Is it believed to be an affable diplomacy deterrent for settling derogatory indifference's?. Is it sought and or believed to make fellow patrons or business owners feel safer?

Or is it just an open invitation to declare open season on mass gun display around children in eateries or for hunting drunks in pubs. Or another anti business measure to infringe upon a proprietors customer base. Where the eventuality of closing establishments and complex's down after an act of mass carnage takes place?

THE PLEA FOR JURISPRUDENCE:

So please by all means in an effort to make sense of this. I'm requesting if you and or anyone else can possibly clarify the reasoning and or justification behind this measure. For which it'd not only be greatly appreciated. But surely you'd be providing more of a public service of enlightenment. Than the alleged states legislators or judiciary is providing for the people.

Suggest removal:

28Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@ VindyPost

Unfortunately it's a bit more vast than that,..

See the routine vast republican majority that comprises the Ohio legislator. Has collaborated this time to have decided it best to promote guns with drinks. See booze and bullets is the social order that's starting the Ohio jobs promise,.. dare we mention their campaign cloak.

See by way of numbers the republican House in Ohio having voted 55-39 in favor of the weapon wielding measure. Where it was the republican led Ohio Senate agreeing via rendering a 25-7 vote favoring promoting it is the network sending it to Kasich,.. pre-scripted.

Therefore beyond Kasich that's a tally of 80 idiots Ohioans are dealing with. See it's more than one which or warlock concocting things like that. Which that number of 80 is actually a tabulation before and beyond adding John Kasich in the count.

See they allege they're limited government. But they outlaw labor protection for those with jobs. While not having mentioned adding a single job offer to anybody in a jobs needing state,.. to them jobs? what jobs? who mentioned anything about jobs?

Where they've prioritized legislating criminalizing a woman's right to an abortion and are currently working on busing in cheat you to beat you gambling parlors,.. ran by a pack of " Honest Johns "

While doing you a flavor favor by increasing the alcohol volume in the bottom line beverage formally called beer. While orchestrating leasing out the alcohol profits to private profiteers,.. ye old boy system.

While topping it all off by now promoting at will gun toting. While enjoying all that prosperous fun and opportunity being provided. Which it just don't get no more " limited government " nor anymore Christian or godlier than that now does it?,.. the power of Christ compels em?

Apparently in all that celestial governance of hellish design. In a self reflective retrospect clearly god spelled and pronounced in republican edict and vernacular is pronounced,.. S-A-T-A-N-I-C..

Suggest removal:

29BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@Nunya. It’s good to see that your bible is a thesaurus. At first I thought you were smarter than everyone else in the room until I reread your message to me. I will give you the courtesy you haven’t shown me and end sentences correctly (or as correctly as I know how) and not use bigger words than most of the country knows. I had to look some of them up wondering if you are even using them in the right context. It’s ok. Your secret is still safe. I had the definitions and still couldn’t figure out if you used them correctly.

Of course I will never be able to change your mind. That is what you mean. Come out and say it. Defending YOUR oppositional view is futile to anyone other than yourself. I looked at past posts of yours and can tell you drive a convertible. You have to. And your rambling about exactly what alcohol does and how it affects social behavior in no way showed me that your mind was far superior and that your point had such an overwhelming argument as to why I should go to the scrap yard and at least get 5.00 for my gun. You can ramble on for hours and days about nonsense but at some point cold hard facts have to stick. Telling me chemical composition of alcohol and behavior isn’t it. Try again or lets just agree to disagree.

As for your smarting off at the end about Debbies and Freddy’s and shooting up the place, nice try. People have already said it in the posts before. It isn’t so much what happens in the bar/establishment. It’s what happens when you walk outside of the bar. That is where the bad guy usually preys. As a person who obeys the laws and has a conceal carry if someone approached me in the parking lot to do harm then harm is what the result will be. I could never defend myself because my gun would be locked in one end of my vehicle while my ammunition would be locked at the other end. If I could get to both in any kind of Superman time then I would next have to load my magazines because I can’t have ammo loaded magazines with the bullets. That is what the current law makes law abiding citizens do. And the government makes it easier for the perps by laying off police officers and not generating jobs. And to make matters worse some of the most left leaning areas of our country like Chicago want to show the millions of names of people who have a CCW as if we are registered child molestors. The chances of me needing to actually protect myself are slim but I camp and kayak and travel to the areas of Columbus, Sandusky, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland. I also have to eat and Applebees keeps coming up in my post so you know where I like to. I want to know walking out that I have a chance if that slim possibility that the bad guy wants more than just my wallet.

Suggest removal:

30Stan(9923 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

VINDYAK :

"This is all about leveling the playing field. The felons and thugs carry knives and guns everywhere so they have an advantage over you, the non-carrying citizen. "

The culture in Youngstown has a dire need to be armed . Just imagine what would happen to a drug dealer if many of his clients thought he wasn't armed . How about that poor fellow whose funds havent kept pace with his desires for street medication . When he is forced to solicit funding to keep medicated, disgruntled donors would cause him physical pain or worse . The average citizen has no such needs so carrying a gun would not be a requirement .

Suggest removal:

31Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@ BLACKECK

Say it ain't so,..

I mean come on lets be real here. No one had any undue advantage. Where with equal footing we delivered our deliberations without undue influence and you certainly weren't setup for the proverbial Wu.

Now where in having exchanged mutual respects for one anothers differing perspectives. Only upon my leveling with you and offering you a scroll of absolute relevancy related matter to present my perspective. There goes the accord and you opt to craft conjecture as to cite me for being too compelling.

I'm not asking, implying nor campaigning for you, me or anyone else to denounce responsible gun ownership. What I've made a point of is laying out just how indefensible this advanced measure of senselessly promoting eventual murders and all but mandating myriads of mayhem is,.. so don't get it twisted.

See I didn't provide that as to serve as any high brow declaration of incomparable intellect. I provided that plethora of variable insight in the matter that I cerebrally deliberated. Solely as pliable inferences to indiscriminately afford you and everyone else. The non prejudicial platforms and platitudes for which and how I'm deriving my deduction. Mind you a deduction that so indisputably empowers me to deduce that this gun tote legislation was and is indefensibly ridiculous.

I'm all for CCW laws and we don't have John Kasish to neither thank nor blame for Ohioans having it legislated into law. However, this measure of outlandishness IS in fact yet another John Kasich and republican mis-leadership fault and where there's no denying that. This is bigger than any partisan knit picking,.. Ohioans deserve far better.

To wit that equally ignorant anti smoking BS. Is the authorization ownership of none other than the ousted Ted Strickland. Where in comparison Ohioans was only offered a gubernatorial choice from bad to worst in choosing between Strickland and Kasich,.. I'm not one to play pansy for anybody.

So it's not about partisan politics and thus to clarify that. I laid it all out in a forthright and transparent manner for all to prod, ponder and deliberate for themselves. For which is in direct and applicable regards to this radically irresponsible and ribald ridiculousness of wing nut legislation,.. now it's alleged by you as my fault because that legislation is just that indefensible.

See since you can't oppose my findings with any plausible defense for this law. In a manner to proclaim exception to my having applied due diligence. In a duplicitous form of dictum to depict it's delirium and judiciously dissect it in a decorum of direct deliverance.

You proclaim my intellect is feigned and my vernacular is somehow coerced. Just because I don't speak Cro-Magnon, mush mouth, backwoods, slang, south fork, nor any other form of flawed phonetics gibberish,.. and never once did I position to draw a comparison.

Suggest removal:

32Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@ ttup1rd

Hear here Albert Blindstein?,..

Imagine YOU showing up and blathering the term " idiot ". For which might I add you've epitomized with impeccable timing,.. folks ya can't just make these kind of specimens up.

See the sensible response is no they most certainly don't provide CCW permits to prior criminals. But they also don't knowingly issue operators licenses to those who go on to become drunk drivers either,.. you understand ANY of that?

Case and point and more specific and descriptively. Is surely somebody in your lifetime has had to have requested, suggested and or told you to contain yourself better. But without question you didn't listen. Where when you did you only repressed yourself long enough to get out of the more responsible disciplinarians company.

Before you went off somewhere and did something stupid in a defiant manner of tantrum act or outburst. To enact your way of displaying they / nobody tells you nothing,.. didn't teach you much either.

Although now you're over 21 and you've somehow possibly managed to have contained yourself long enough to fly under the radar of the judicial system. Now you're pumped and primed to be a culprit or victim of your own irresponsibly, immature lack of direction or discipline,.. and no I don't want to read that you've senselessly shot anybody nor that anybody felt your actions made them feel they had to shoot you either.

So see what the push back here is those combative loose screws. That come across just like you've announced yourself as. Very well may have no priors and therefore qualify for both a gun purchase and CCW. To include being the proverbial flackey Jake that starts a clip toss over something simple as feeling insecure,... your screed informs us that life terrifies you.

See what that means is it's already distinctly detectable. That priors or not placing a weapon in your possession. Is about as prudent as handing a kid some sharp scissors and letting them scamper across the room,.. an otherwise avoidable accident waiting to happen.

Suggest removal:

33AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago


All you need is to pass a back ground check...

I wonder how congresswoman Giffords feels about this. It is a very sad situation that happened in Arizona.

But the shooter passed a back ground check, so he must be OK for him to carry a weapon.

The suspect in Saturday's deadly rampage purchased a firearm legally after passing an FBI background check, the company's vice president of hunting operations told FoxNews.com on Sunday.

The suspect in Saturday's deadly rampage purchased a firearm legally after passing an FBI background check, the company's vice president of hunting operations told FoxNews.com on Sunday.

I understand those that want to carry weapons. However in order to get a CCW, I feel one should have to take safety and shooting classes each year.

Suggest removal:

34BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Facts;

Giffords was pro gun

Alcohol kills people

Sober people run people over every day

57% of gun fatalities are from suicide

Texting, cell phone use, and lipstick application while driving have caused vehicular homicide.

Besides not owning a gun each one of you has probably drank alcohol, even in it's smallest form, and got into your vehicle. I rarely drink and one bottle of beer impairs me. Should alcohol be banned? Should cars be banned because people run other people over with them? How far do you want to go with this? Nunya's mind will never be changed and neither will yours but I'd be more than happy to address the parade of stories you may have about victims and I can parade similar stories of loss of life that you won't even want to touch. A felon can get out of prison and hop right into his own car. He can't go buy a gun legally though.

I'm a different conceal carry person as I've said before. I think there should be limitations to magazine capacity and the type of weapon you can buy. Fully automatic is overkill. Most CCW people will fight against me on that like you antigunners fight on all guns period. But, the pro fully automatic people can say that deaths from one of those weapons is alot smaller than most every day homicides and I'd have no real answer for them.

What about this deadly rampage Saturday though? I don't know what you are talking about to even comment. I like to get some facts straight before commenting. Where did this happen and what happened?

Suggest removal:

35Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@ BLACKECK

Is this ever interesting,..

See here in your mentioning Giffords, Alcohol and Sober accidents and suicides. You meticulously mix some valid points in irrelevant context with some all out lies.

For which I'll not contest in detail in this entry. But be it known you're infusing an array of falsehoods via way of baseless statements and misleading innuendo. As to divert the facts from being so clearly understood.

That being YOU want to rally support for citizens bearing sidearms / guns in bars, stores, restaurants and sporting events. Where I and others don't agree with you nor the legislation that John Kasich is forcing into effect on Ohioans,..PERIOD !!!

It doesn't nor would it matter who the governor was by name, age, gender, race nor party brand. Nor even what political party the worthless faction that's legislatively aligning with him to force it into law upon the society is and or would be,.. it's far more important than that.

It's an opposition that without bias, prejudice nor any aspect of political partisanship. I and those of like sensibilities and civilities. Absolutely disagree with the legislation itself and it's with unified merit,.. and YOU'RE trying to lie about it.

Now for the sake of brevity as to allow that basic clarity to sink in. In this entry I'll allow those facts to be stated and stand as self evident on their own merit. However, later I'll expound upon more of an array of enlightenment's. Which for some are facts that serve as complexities of relevancy by virtue of the vast expanse of their enormity.

Lets fittingly call this current incident " If mere looks could Kill ",.. http://www.vindy.com/news/2011/jun/17...

Suggest removal:

36BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Nunya, I've had enough. Don't ever call me a liar unless you say exactly what I lied about. That is a powerful word you have not backed up. Give me the due diligence to at least defend myself. Tell me the exact lie you think I have said so I could at least lay out the evidence. You've shot off at the mouth plenty and I never called you a liar. Man up and point out what I have supposedly lied about or look the other way like it's Nunya business.

Suggest removal:

37jupiter(116 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

if you are going to carry a firearm, you need prove that you can "retain it." Sad to say but most of these gun nuts have trouble bending over to tie their own shoes. It should be real interesting when one gets punched in the face, their weapon taken off of them, and then used against them. A tragedy but one easily avoided.
The gun nuts need to stop trying to stroke their own egos with these ridiculous adolescent power fantasies. "Sorry," would-be Dirty Harry, but local law enforcement does not want you brandishing a firearm...especially at a chaotic scene where they may not be able to tell the good guys from the bad guys.
Let it go. Wanna contribute to society in a big way? Support your local police department. Wanna contribute in an even bigger way? Support your school district. Get involved...just not in possible running gun battles.

Suggest removal:

38BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Jupiter, my brother is a police officer. He says most police officers he works with prefer the educated innocent to carry guns. You can find some officers who don't want you to carry a gun but don't generalize it and say police don't want you to have them. That is how this whole story is. You will find talk from both sides. The mahoning county sheriff makes it hard to get a conceal carry. He asks for more than is lawfully needed. Surrounding counties do not.

You also generalize and say most gun nuts can't bend over and tie their own shoes. Maybe you mean the ones without a conceal carry. I've been to the shooting ranges and to get my CCW and every one of them looked capable of tying their shoes. And you'd be surprised how many people have guns. You think that any gun owner comes out like Yosimete Sam with a gun in each hand telling the world he's a gun carrier. You'd be surprised how many of us there are. Hopefully we don't shoot ourselves trying to tie our shoes.

@ Nunya. Read the story you had linked in your last post. What does it mean or prove. We don't know if the man who shot the other man was legally carrying. So what if it was outside a bar. If anything the arguement there could be that if the man who got shot had taken a gun course and was carrying legally that he might not be dead now. But then again by Jupiter's account he probably would have knocked himself out dead on a rock because he bent down to try and tie his shoes.

Suggest removal:

39BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

For Nunya. Here is a story of a man who ran his wife down purposely with the van. If you would like I could pick two stories for every one you show me.

http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news...

Suggest removal:

40VindyPost(436 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Congresswoman Gabby Giffords WAS (past tense) pro gun...Let's find out her on-going opinion as of late. I'm certainly sure she and Mark Kelly and the citizens of AZ have another opinion now.
++ May she continue to recover to the fullest extent.++

Suggest removal:

41BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@Nunya. Here is the entire story. He wasn't carrying legally and had no right to shoot the man.
http://articles.mcall.com/2011-06-16/...

@Vindypost. Don't assume Gabby changed her mind about guns or anybody else for that matter. You are assuming. What would you do if she comes out and says she is still progun? Would you feel differently? Most likely not. For some reason everyone against guns assumes that because of a tragedy like Arizona that everyone turns anti gun. Did you think that it most likely did both? It pushed some to get guns and some to get rid of them.

Suggest removal:

42jupiter(116 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

well, perhaps "Blackeck" YOU should become a police officer as well. That way you can carry a gun with you anytime you want (within parameters as per 926B of Chapter 44 of Title 18 USC).
I really don't want to hear your second hand stories. At the end of the day all I have to rely on is my own training and experience. Training and experience that shows this idea is all sorts of bad....

Suggest removal:

43Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago


@ BLACKECK

Ohhhh,..

So now in you finding yourself losing this debate. You're shifting from trying to depict me as some individual of feigned intelligence of coerced vernacular. To now mount an oppositional effort to allege I'm unjustifiably citing you as one who's resorted to flat out lying,..and you attempt to feign ANOTHER angle of alleging offense?

That said and as per your request in post # 39. In not perverting nor falsely accusing you of anything. Here's to reintroducing you to those " Mis-Truth's " you've interjected. Where you beg to differ with me for citing them as lies you're telling,..

FOR STARTERS:

1, You espoused - " Jobs aren't being lost in bars because they can't smoke. It's because people don't have the extra cash to blow on beer and cigarettes that have been taxed to death. " - reference post # 4.

The brief response is you're wrong and to have alleged that as fact. In and of itself means you're lying. See to prove it first here's the factual numbers,..

HERE'S THE FINANCIAL PROOF:

Ohio alcohol sales have been on the rise since 2007. The numbers were / are $734.8 million statewide for spirituous liquor sales in 2009.which is up $15.7 million more than 2008..

Where to measure the record increase from $734.8 million in 2009. The numbers in 2010 were $742.7 million in fiscal year 2010. Which is up $12.8 million from the previous record of over sales in Fiscal Year 2009

So see opposite to what you alleged as alcohol consumption being down in Ohio. Ohioans have actually been posting record increases in Alcohol sales,.. http://www.theotherpaper.com/news/art...

CONCLUSION: Alcohol sales AREN'T down as you falsely alleged. In fact nor have that market revenue been down for almost half a decade,... Ok?

PERSPECTIVE NOTE: To include that influx of alcohol consumption. Unequivocally further bolsters my oppositional perspective of invoking more guns in social settings.

To include citing anyone facilitating the infusion of legislating gun possession in any of said social / public establishments. Is nothing less than legislators trying to incite social unrest and abating a massive influx in gun related casualties,... Got that?

Suggest removal:

44Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

HERE'S THE COLLATERAL FALLOUT::

See if that's not enough to eclipse what you've alleged. Of course to not focus upon any one single aspect of your " mis-truths ". I'll even present some unbiased cause and effect stories that you can learn from.

a.} Hear it from a proprietor it's running out of business,.. http://www.vindy.com/news/2011/may/09...

QUOTE.- " Bojangles doesn’t offer food or serve anyone under 21, so owner Jo Risk sees the smoking ban as a threat to the survival of the family-owned business.

“ This is putting me out of business, and I don’t think West Carrollton or anyone else can afford to lose any more tax dollars,” she said. " - END QUOTE.

b.} The effect to remain in business,.. http://www.vindy.com/news/2011/apr/14...

QUOTE - " Councilman Jeff Johnson says the ordinance should not apply at Highland Park Golf Course. He tells The Plain Dealer newspaper the city facility would have a harder time competing with other privately-owned courses if golfers aren’t allowed to light up during a round." - END QUOTE.

c.} Criminalizing lawful behavior of private businesses,.. http://www.vindy.com/news/2011/may/08...

QUOTE - “I think for an enforcement program to be effective, there has to be a hammer,” Montgomery County Health Commissioner Jim Gross said. “And it’s pretty clear right now this program does not have an effective penalty system to change that behavior.” - END QUOTE.

Now for 2 conclusive notes here,..

1. I didn't make any of that up and Ohioans didn't do that to themselves either. Yet those are factual reflections of counter productivity and unnecessary judicial influx. That's induced by unjust legislation has done to Ohio,.. Ted Strickland did that and John Kasich is making it WORSE.

2. Where as a double conundrum. You not only inaccurately alleged alcohol and tobacco sales were suffering. Which unfortunately not a chance and you weren't even remotely close to being accurate about that,.. personally I'd have wished you were.

But you even falsely alleged job detraction was all " China's " and or foreign imparts fault. Where you even contended that wayward legislation had absolutely nothing to do with killing those Mom & Pop and small establishment jobs,.. AND BOTH MYSELF AND THE FACTS INFORMED YOU THAT WHAT YOU'VE ALLEGED IS JUST NOT TRUE !!!

Suggest removal:

45Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

@ BLACKECK

WAIT THERE'S MORE:

See then in regards to oppositional view. You ALSO proceeded to have alleged - " Besides not owning a gun each one of you " { stop right there } - reference post # 37.

See aside from your contrite of trying to discount myself. Might I direct you to recognize poster " saddad " - reference post #16. As well as poster " Wapiti " - reference # 19. Then somehow you'd even tried to ignore poster " eyemhip " - reference post # 24.

See those are just a small number of individuals who's presence and opposing perspectives. That you've " somehow " tried to ignore / discard and or discount. Which occurred in your effort to mislead people and attempt to seek credence for your argument that's been factually discredited,..

Hence in review and retrospect. Not only did you " lie " in a manner that would favor framing your narratives as facts. But even beyond that the sad reality is loose hinged legislation like this. Compels those with disqualification priors that's refrained. As well as those more deliberate and persistent criminals that's incorrigibly active. .

To either ensure they're defensively armed, offensively and or seriously ponder illegally re-arming themselves. Simply on the merit of they'll refuse to lay prey to to those like you on the basis of a mere technicality.

See by being so dishonest and deceptive in trying to advocate this loose hinged legislation. Beyond any political view your dishonesty serves as presenting you as one that passed the background check as a CCW holder.

But yet your having displayed no value in as much as speaking the truth. The compounds a legislation that glorifies and all but makes it impossible to avoid guns.

So regardless of such an individual bearing a record of priors or not. You and this legislation combine to send a signal to one and all. That they can't trust you, your character, judgment nor your demeanor,.. people don't like being lied to.

So in the realm of life and the protective posture there of. In regards to having their person and interests defended. In regards to guns it's no stretch for their sentiments to be. They'll have one because you've got one,... and NONE of that bodes well for society.

Suggest removal:

46BLACKECK(12 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Webster's dictionary:

Liar- a person who lies
lie - an untrue statement with intent to deceive

If any of my statements were untrue or generalized and made to look untrue I can tell you I did not do them with intent to deceive. I don't like lies and don't try to lie. For Nunya I went a bit further and looked online at dictionary.com and this is what they say:

lie: 1. a false statement made with deliberate attempt to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood

2. something intended or serving to convey a false impression

3. An inaccurate or false statement.

To all. I am guilty of #3 according to dictionary.com. I won't say where yet until I address everything Nunya said but I will but I can tell you I did not intenionally try to deceive anybody. My words are being used against me and when I have the time (I have an 11 hour drive ahead of me in a couple hours) then I will give Nunya the pat on the back for being able to use the word liar against me correctly according to dictionary.com. I will also take the time to say Nunya is a liar as well and use his words and links against him as he has so elliquintly done to me. This is no longer about conceal carry but an attack on my character. For Nunya this has been about who is winning an arguement. His words, "So now in you finding yourself losing this debate" and "Was merely because you already knew you couldn't defend any oppositional view in regards to what I stated". For you Nunya it's about "winning". In my eyes for you to win I would have to have lost something. Pretty soon it won't matter if it was you having more points than I or could somehow prove I am the bigger liar. It's my presumed fact that I will be able to carry in and around a bar. I think that you said you in fact are a ccw carrier. Will you leave your guns at home Bill or will you take your guns to town (a bar) when it is legal?

Suggest removal:

47VindyPost(436 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Blackeck...

Your Post #37 Said Giffords Was Pro Gun...I am Not Assuming....She Was Pro Gun ---I agree with you---and it is past tense rather than Giffords IS Pro Gun

Suggest removal:

48Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

Oh no you don't,..

Be it known my fellow Americans that the individual known as " BLACKECK " Has ran from enduring anymore exposure. For which that manifesto of muck { reference post # 49 } Sagaciously served as his rendition of the " Bloated Toad " retreat with hopes for others to forget him serving as a fountain of false offerings,.. what a flub.

In debate of positions I offered facts and in retort even cited numerous lies he'd tried to infuse and left him humiliated,.. no by intent but by overwhelming relevant content.

He knew this was going to get to such a point of public awareness. That his handlers told him to shut up and hope the conversation wasn't revisited,.. it's textbook.

I've given him better than four days to contend whatever he wanted. However, just as expected he was seeking a period of dormancy and hoped there was no further offerings of perspective to bring this to the forefront of Ohioans awareness,..

Suggest removal:

49Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago

This is relevant to add,..

NOTE: The mere looks conflict that resulted into a shooting. In fact DID start inside the bar,...http://articles.mcall.com/2010-09-20/news/mc-allentown-bar-shooting-20100920_1_allentown-bar-allentown-police-man-shot

Locally and recently,.. http://www.vindy.com/news/2011/jun/21...

Could anyone imagine if there were guns being welcomed as personal totes by those in the bar scrum,.. Hmm?

Smart money says mayhem of mass causality would have occurred. To include the cops would have surely been endangered once the weapons had been deployed,..

Suggest removal:

50Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 3 months ago


NOTE: Link enhancement,... http://articles.mcall.com/2010-09-20/...

Suggest removal:

51ronalde(1 comment)posted 3 years, 2 months ago

have the law makers in ohio lost their minds this is insane to allow guns anywhere except for hunting,people that carry guns are looking for trouble,

Suggest removal:

52InColumbiana(63 comments)posted 3 years, 2 months ago

@ronalde - the tinfoil hatters don't feel safe unless their favorite piece of steel is snuggled up against their cheek :-)

At least now we'll be able to tell those who are carrying in a bar... they'll be the ones drinking plain old coke or sprite all night.

Suggest removal:

53Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 2 months ago

@ Quail { birdbrain }

You're hilarious { and easy },.. ROTFFLMAO !!!

Ok so in my transferring my cerebral thought to visual text conveyance { typing } I forgot to type in a descriptive word. So now in battling your apparent inferiority complex. Your mentality leads to you try to use that as some " The sky's falling " shield to hide it,.. what ELSE could it be?

See I'm an on topic type of individual and being of a interest relevancy reader.In contrast to you frankly I'd never presumed / found your opinions neither pertinent, relevant or discerning. To include if the English language baffles you there " Bird brain-iest ". I'd suggest you not be so idiotically insistent upon continuing your imbecilic inclination of trying to have me candidly crush your ugly " and now adulated " little ego { O-Tay? },.. LMAO !!!

See irony is the term that wasn't typed in was " Conjecture ". as in INSERTION Quote - " See aside from your contrite CONJECTURE of trying to discount myself." - End Quote

See non substantive CONJECTURE and LYING while WHINING is actually all you're offering. Mind you distinguishably add such " soliloquies " as silly, stupid { attempt at snide } and as your irrefutably being such a Simpleton,.. yep now I've noticed you.

So now see how correct, SIMPLISTIC, accurate, masterful and RELEVANT that retort is you ridiculous rube,... Hmmm?

As far as Birds go my foolishly fowl feathered fiend. You fit the description of a Gooney bird with the temperament of a common Loon. That's embraced the of Chicken little mindset and bear the disposition of a Yellow Bellied Sap Sucker,..know what I mean there Plucky?

NOTE: Mind you I only responded as to loosen the mood. In a manner of setting you " Str8 " in a jest that would give readers a good laugh that we can now all share at your expense,..

See I live of a selflessness of embracing when you smile the world smiles with you. Thus in this case where in sharing that smile You insisted I now allow everybody to laugh at YOU,.. .YOU MAY NOW TRY TO RETRIEVE YOUR FEATHERS.

Suggest removal:

54Nunya(1356 comments)posted 3 years, 2 months ago

So now,..

Awaiting to be proven to be " dishonest " and or unfounded where's " BLACKECK? ",.. cowering maybe?

Which for that matter if alleging I lack a fluent understanding and operable usage of the English language. One has to wonder just what's left of that birdbrain called " Qail ", now,.. thoroughly PLUCKED !!!

When you base your selfless perspectives on non bias facts. It's something how the foolish phony's and frauds flee. If / when they challenge on mere conjecture. And find themselves getting emphatically chiseled and chided in a manner of no nonsense opposition.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport