Ohio AG: NRA said signature on gun ban opposition letter 'not needed'

November 7, 11:59 AMGun Rights ExaminerDavid Codrea

Previous Next

1 comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

(AP Photo/Kiichiro Sato)

---

Related Articles

• Why didn't OH AG sign letter opposing semi-automatic firearms ban?

On June 12 of this year, the National Rifle Association told us about opposition to a renewed gun ban by many state attorneys general:

On June 11, the top law enforcement officials of nearly half the states signed a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, expressing their opposition to reinstatement of the federal ban on semi-automatic firearms...

The letter is here. NRA further advised their members:

We encourage NRA members to let these state officials know we appreciate them standing up to the incessant clamor for gun control that is currently coming from anti-gun groups and their media allies.

My AG, Richard Cordray of Ohio, had not signed the letter. I wanted to know "why the hell not," especially since NRA gave him an "A" rating in the 2008 election. So I wrote him an open letter asking, and also asking about prior political positions where he was reported to be an "anti-gun Democrat," who "supported...gun control," backed "gun-free school zones," and urged passage of the Brady Bill.

That was on June 15. I got my reply yesterday, via email, from Jason Hill, Constituent Liaison, Constituent Relations and Outreach:

November 6, 2009
RE: Assault Ban
Dear Mr. Codrea:

Thank you for your inquiry about Attorney General Cordray's stance on Second Amendment issues.

You asked why this office did not sign a letter sent by several state attorneys general to the United States Attorney General urging that the semi-automatic weapons ban not be renewed. We receive many such “sign-on” requests and typically join such efforts when we are convinced that it will make a real difference and not be merely symbolic. Attorney General Cordray spoke to his contacts at the NRA who told him the congressional leadership had already decided not to renew the ban and, therefore, our advocacy was not needed at that time. Since then, we continue to monitor this issue and have not seen any other developments. Nonetheless, we hope that this has not created any confusion about Attorney General Cordray's strong and firm support for Second Amendment rights.

Attorney General Cordray taught constitutional law for fifteen years at Ohio State's Moritz College of Law and believes strongly in the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood by the Framers and has been traditionally accepted by American society. He has consistently pledged to support existing laws pertaining to concealed weapons and is working with law enforcement to see that Ohio's new Castle Doctrine laws - which enhance every Ohioan's right to self-defense - are fairly and uniformly carried out.

So far this year, Attorney General Cordray has taken the following steps that may be of interest to you. First, and most important, he directed that the State of Ohio throw its support behind the NRA's position in a case out of Chicago, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review that case in order to hold that the individual rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment are affirmative limits on state governments as well as the federal government, thereby invalidating ordinances prohibiting possession of handguns in the home (please see the enclosed news release for more information). Second, after the Supreme Court recently did decide to grant review in that case, Attorney General Cordray has been working with Texas, Arkansas, and Georgia as the four states to co-author a brief advocating the same position on the merits (other states will likely join this brief, and still others may submit a brief taking the opposite position). The case will be argued later this term and decided by next July. Third, Attorney General Cordray reversed the prior decision made by his predecessor in order to rearm the Medicaid Fraud agents who work in his office. Fourth, Attorney General Cordray worked with Senator Faber to reverse a decision made by his predecessor that would have raised the background check fees for those renewing their CCW permits, and obtained changes in the law to block any increase in those fees for current permit holders. Fifth, Attorney General Cordray is participating in several state courts actively defending the state law that preempts local gun ordinances in favor of a uniform state law.

In each of these ways, Attorney General Cordray's efforts are making a real difference to uphold and protect the Second Amendment rights of all Ohioans. Recognizing his commitment to our constitutional liberties, the National Rifle Association has long supported Attorney General Cordray and his work on these issues. As Ohio's chief law officer, he will continue to advocate for the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms within the wide legal bounds of the United States and Ohio Constitutions, while working to punish criminals who misuse firearms to harm others.

Thank you again for contacting our office and please let us know if you have any additional questions or thoughts about these issues.

Sincerely,

Richard Cordray
OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL

I guess what's missing is when AG Cordray was told by NRA his support was not needed. The question that comes to my mind, and that's still unanswered, is where was he when it was needed? Or was the whole effort "merely symbolic" political theater? Of course such letters are symbolic. The question becomes is such symbolism irrelevant?

Understand, this isn't meant to take away from the good things AG Cordray is now supporting, particularly the Chicago lawsuit and his work against "local gun ordinances." I know many good people who have evolved their positions on guns, and that's to be encouraged. But I also expect "A" ratings to be more than "merely symbolic." From NRA, from GOA, from anybody, and the AG would do well to establish his deserving a high grade by repudiating specific measures he supported in the past.

Tomorrow, barring developments in the news that push it to the back burner, I'll talk about something AG Cordray can do--right now, and with negligible effort and cost--that will not be symbolic, and that has potential to defuse an actual danger to Buckeye State gun owners lawfully exercising their right to bear arms. It might even save somebody's life.