The office of Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine has responded to Gun Rights Examiner’s concerns that police comments about “double tapping” open carriers show a dangerous disregard for state law, and unsurprisingly, has decided to do nothing about it other than have a proxy deny responsibility and punt the ball to state representatives.
“Dear David,” the presumptuous salutation to a mere citizen in a response letter (conversely signed “Very respectfully yours”) by Constituent Liaison S. Morgen begins.
“Thank you for contacting the Ohio Attorney General’s Office regarding your belief that many police forces around the state are not properly trained with respect to open carry provisions,” it begins. “In reviewing your communication, it is my understanding that you believe that many law enforcement officers misunderstand open carry and how to handle constituents who are exercising their legal rights.”
If by “understanding” S. (I assume the familiarity means we’re on a first-initial basis now?) means I forwarded documented accounts of police in years past illegally harassing, bullying, drawing guns on and endangering the lives of citizens who weren’t breaking any laws, and of current police officers contemptuously “joking” about “double tapping” citizens openly carrying firearms, why, yes, one could say I “believe” that. Why Mike and S. don’t after being shown, complete with validating links and screen captures, and after further being informed that evidence was erased after it was revealed they had been sent to the state’s chief law enforcement officer, is on them to explain.
“Matters such as this would need to be taken up with the legislature, as they are in a position to present ideas and vote on issues before the Ohio General Assembly,” S. continues. “Training standards are, as you understand, set by state law, and treatment of people exercising their open carry right would require specific training changes. Consequently, you may wish to contact your state legislators.”
Wait a minute: The AG making it known not to shoot innocent citizens for exercising their lawful rights requires a vote by politicians? What if they vote that it’s OK? And Ohio cops need “special training” beyond telling them not to?
What we're supposed to do if Herod sends this back to Pilate is left unsaid, but it’s clear DeWine’s only intention here is to show deliberate indifference to the matter and wash his hands of it. And that’s curious, since his signature page in the manual that proclaims “Protecting Ohio’s Families”, the one that that defines the legality of open carry (see bottom of page 17), gives a pledge one would who didn’t know him better would assume he meant to keep.
“I am committed to the comprehensive training of law enforcement and the public,” he assures us in a cover letter signed -- you guessed it -- “Very respectfully yours.” Yet telling chiefs and sheriffs to make sure their people understand “Don’t shoot good citizens” is evidently beyond the guy. That's some commitment. And silly me, thinking the office into which the Ohio peace officer training academy folds into would have any say in admonishing the troops not to murder people, at least without first having our reps put the proposition to a floor vote, assuming it makes it out of committee.
“Are you forgetting that this Republican sellout is totally anti-gun?” a comment poster on the first article in this series asked. “Do you honestly expect him to do his job now? He is worse than Feinstein.”
If something bad now happens, DeWine won’t be able to say he had no idea. He won’t be able to distance his part in not lifting a finger when he easily could have. Plus, it may prove useful the next time this career politician campaigns for office.
If you're a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won't find in the mainstream press, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (David Codrea) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit "The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance."
Those who would disarm you against your will can't always get what they want. My latest GUNS Magazine "Rights Watch" column is online, and you can read it well before the issue hits the stands. Click here to read "Gun-grabbers Can't Get No Satisfaction.”
Perhaps the Bloomberg moms would like to convince defensive gun use victors who refused to be prey that it’s all in their heads, or maybe even admit they’d rather see them dead than armed. No? See my latest JPFO alert: “Tell people who've saved their lives with a gun ‘It never happens.’"