Ohio's gungrabbers get a well deserved beat down.

Ohio Lawmakers Override Governor's Gun Bill Veto

(CNSNews.com) - For the first time in nearly three decades, the Ohio Legislature has voted to override a governor's veto. However, the new law outgoing Gov. Robert Taft tried to kill, which establishes a statewide standard for the concealed carrying of firearms, is likely to be challenged in court by the mayors of Ohio's largest cities, where most guns are banned.

The GOP-controlled state Senate on Tuesday voted 21-12 - one more vote than needed - to override the Republican governor's veto of House Bill 337. The Ohio House voted 71-21 last Thursday to bypass Taft's veto, the third in his eight-year tenure.

"Cities are out of the firearm regulation business," Buckeye Firearms Association legislative chairman Ken Hanson said after the Senate vote.

Jeff Garvas, president of Ohioans for Concealed Carry, said in a statement that the framers of Ohio's Home Rule Amendment had never intended local governments to have authority over laws that are of statewide concern.

"Local governments have created a patchwork of unknown laws aimed at disarming their law-abiding residents in different ways than their neighbors in another town," Garvas said. "This confusing patchwork also unfairly traps the unwary gun owner traveling through their jurisdictions.

"This reform isn't just needed, it's long overdue and brings Ohio in line with the rest of the country," Garvas added, noting that 43 other states deal with gun-control issues on the state level.

Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA), agreed with Garvas, calling the vote "a common-sense move that will eliminate confusion among private citizens and peace officers."

"This reform measure effectively overrides local gun bans in such places as parks, and it also will nullify local bans on certain firearms," Gottlieb said in a statement.

"Equally, if not more important," he added, the new law "abolishes the absurd requirement that Ohio citizens who are licensed to carry concealed must have their guns in the open while driving."

"Now all Ohio residents will know that whether they travel from Akron to Ashland, Cincinnati to Cleveland or anywhere in between, the firearms laws will be the same, and they won't risk running afoul of some local regulation," Gottlieb said.

Three Democrats - including Attorney General-elect Marc Dann - joined 18 Republicans in overriding the veto on Tuesday, the same day a Quinnipiac University Polling Institute survey revealed that a majority of Ohio respondents said overriding local gun laws was a bad idea.

'Appalling arrogance'

Taft, who is leaving office in a few weeks due to term limits, said the bill exceeded its goal of cleaning up Ohio's concealed weapons law because it pre-empted about 80 local gun laws.

"The governor strongly believes his veto was the right thing to do and that our cities should have the ability to protect their citizens through reasonable firearms regulation," said Taft spokesman Mark Rickel. "He continues to believe that the bill was over-broad and that overturning local assault weapon and handgun laws is a mistake."

Toby Hoover, executive director of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence, agreed with Taft's reasoning and accused Ohio lawmakers of showing "appalling arrogance against the will of and the respect for the people of Ohio to govern themselves."

"State legislators have shown their true colors by passing a bill and then today overriding the governor's veto in order to take rights away from the people of Ohio," Hoover said in a statement. "To please the gun lobby, our legislators preempted all local ordinances that regulate firearms.

"These laws range from having gun dealers register in the city, to permits to purchase and assault weapon bans, to child safety, all of which city governments and their citizens thought were beneficial to the safety of their communities," he noted.

Within hours of the override vote, mayors in some of the state's largest cities were considering legal action to prevent the new law from taking effect.