OH AG candidate Dave Yost answers gun rights questionnaire

November 8, 2:45 PMGun Rights ExaminerDavid Codrea

Previous Next

7 comments 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

Courtesy Dave Yost for Attorney General

---

Related Articles

• More gun rights questions for Ohio AG Cordray

In my last column, I said I was sending the Gun Rights Political Questionnaire to current Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray. I also said that Republican contender Dave Yost has responded to my request.

Here are his answers to my questions:

1. Do you believe that the Constitution is the "supreme law of the land" and that the Bill of Rights acknowledges our birthrights?

Yes

2. If so, should these rights be proactively protected from infringement by all levels of government, including city, county and state?

Yes

3. Please give some examples of gun laws you consider constitutional.

Weapons under disability, use of a firearm in commission of a felony, tort protection for gun manufacturers.

4. Please give some examples of gun laws you consider unconstitutional.

AWB, Discretionary Licensing Schemes, Purchase Limits.

5. Does the right to bear arms include the right for any peaceable citizen to carry them concealed without a permit, as in Vermont?

Just the same as any other constitutional right, the right to keep and bear arms is subject to very limited regulation. Citizens have the right to carry a concealed weapon, either without process, such as Alaska or Vermont, or under a non-discretionary, shall-issue licensing system with the license recognized by all 48 other states.

6. Do you believe that Americans have a right to own, use and carry weapons of military pattern, and will you use the prestige of elected office to publicly promote that right?

The Constitution does not limit the Second Amendment to hunting or sport, nor does it mention "military pattern." To be fair, I don't think the Second Amendment goes so far as to include, say, nuclear weapons -- but it ought to be treated like any other constitutional right. That is, the government's attempt to regulate is subject to "strict scrutiny" judicial review, and must promote a "compelling governmental interest" -- a highly exacting standard that almost no laws meet.

7. Do you support or oppose registration of weapons? Why?

No. It would not meet the "strict scrutiny" standard set out above.

8. Do you support or oppose licensing requirements to own or carry firearms? Why?

The government may not license gun ownership any more than it may license freedom of speech.

9. What specific gun laws will you work to get repealed?

I am not running for the legislature, and working to overturn any law is not the proper role of the state's top lawyer. However, I have specified above the constitutional limits of lawmakers.

10. If elected, will you back your words of support for firearms rights up with consistent actions? How?

If you don't believe the answers in 1-9, why would the answer to this make you feel better?

The better question is what HAVE I done. I signed on to the Maricopa County brief in Heller, arguing that the Second Amendment is an individual right. I personally review firearms cases in my jurisdiction to make sure that charges are not brought against legitimate gun owners. I own guns -- a Sig .380, my personal sidearm, a Ruger LCP for my wife (and me when my clothing doesn't cover the Sig) a Winchester 30-30 carbine, a Mossberg .22 A Universal 12-ga.; a Mossberg 16-ga. -- get it? Not the token handgun the politician claims to keep in the night stand.

----

Before commenting begins, I want to throw something into the mix for your consideration: The other Republican contender, Mike DeWine, might as well be on the Brady Campaign payroll. I can think of no stronger message to send the Republican establishment than to let them know anti-gunners will no longer be tolerated, so they'd better stop offering them.

Mr. Yost also wrote in his email to let him know if I had any more questions.

Just one: We also talked in the last column about having the AG use his office to ensure police know that peaceable open carry is lawful. I'll send that link to Mr. Yost and ask if he has thoughts on that. 

UPDATE: Here is his response to the preceding paragraph:

The Attorney General oversees the OPATA, the agency charged with training police. It is certainly appropriate for the AG to make sure law enforcement officers understand the law -- and most of them do.

Still, police officers die in the line of duty every year by gunfire, and I understand why they are wary. I spoke to a police memorial service earlier this year:

 

http://daveyost.com/blog/2009/05/16/the-unfinished-work-of-justice/

 

In the states that collect the data, virtually no crime is committed by those who hold a CCL. Ohio should collect and publish this data.