August 23, 2014

Elyria
Partly sunny
82°F
test

Oberlin’s Park Street Park becomes center of gun debate

From left, David Sonner, of Oberlin; Michael Holubar, of Wakeman; Fred Tegtmeyer, of Ashland; Jeff Phillips and Chase, 8, of Oberlin; Nick Mascari, of Wellington; and Brian Kuzawa, of Ashland, debate whether guns should be allowed in public at Park Street Park in Oberlin, which does not allow firearms. KRISTIN BAUER/CHRONICLE

From left, David Sonner, of Oberlin; Michael Holubar, of Wakeman; Fred Tegtmeyer, of Ashland; Jeff Phillips and Chase, 8, of Oberlin; Nick Mascari, of Wellington; and Brian Kuzawa, of Ashland, debate whether guns should be allowed in public at Park Street Park in Oberlin, which does not allow firearms. KRISTIN BAUER/CHRONICLE

OBERLIN — It wasn’t exactly the usual scene Saturday in Oberlin’s Park Street Park. After all, the town reknowned for its liberalism generally doesn’t have gun-toting folks hanging out.

But that is exactly what occurred Saturday when some Ashland residents and their friends paid a visit to the city with their guns visibly worn and found themselves facing off with those against the idea in the very same park.

The visit coincided with an ongoing debate in the city about a city law banning weapons in city parks. The law, however, contradicts state laws, and gun-rights groups are pushing the city to change it or else face legal action.

“We’re here to educate the public,” said Cleveland resident Harry Wynn, an eight-year gun rights activist. “We’re keeping everyone informed that you have the right to defend yourself.”

The park event was staged by Brian Kuzawa, who is the lead challengers of Oberlin’s law. He had a gun visible during the Family Fair in Oberlin in August, which is when the debate about the the city law first surfaced.

Kuzawa and his crew numbering at roughly a dozen hung out on one of the side of the park. Not far away, roughly 20 opponents of their actions — including Council representatives and some seeking to join Council — claimed their ground.

With the exception of one brief exchange, the two sides didn’t meet or talk.

Sharon Pearson, currently running for Oberlin City Council, said the advocates promise to continually appear in the park until the law changes.

“It’s not a part of Oberlin’s culture and I feel as if we’re targeted because of that,” said Pearson, echoing a sentiment shared by several attendees. “Guns in public places are not safe.”

Councilman Bryan Burgess agreed.

“The first reaction you have seeing a person carrying a gun is apprehension,” Burgess said. “The conversation then turns to the weapon, not the person.”

As those with guns strapped to their sides walked into the park, a man and his children noticed and left the park.

The only debate between the two sides during the Saturday standoff occurred when former Councilman David Sonner got into a heated exchange with the pro-gun faction.

“They’re immovable and so am I,” said Sonner, who said he regrets having once shot a skunk in town, which led to his arrest. “It’s lunatic to increase accessibility to lethal weapons.”

Kuzawa, however, said in the wake of gun-related violence in Newtown, Conn., and Aurora, Colo., carrying a weapon and being able to protect oneself is important.

Kuzawa and Ohioans for Concealed Carry have both issued warnings to the city that they’ll pursue further action if the city law isn’t changed.

Oberlin resident Megan Shief — who jokingly offered to purchase the Oberlin parks as a means to privatize and rid them of guns — said she doesn’t think the Council can stand firm on this one regardless of public opinion.

Council, she said, will “cave in.”

Contact Elizabeth Kuhr at 329-7155 or ekuhr@chroniclet.com.

  • oldruss

    This little drama is a moot point. The Supreme Court of Ohio has already declared that regulations (ordinances) passed by municipalities that try to regulate firearms in their public parks are illegal as they conflict with state statues. It’s a done deal, and the Oberlin City Council and others who are continuing to argue that Oberlin has some right to regulate firearms that is different than every other municipality in Ohio are either ignorant of the law or are too zealous in their oppositon to our right to bear arms, guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and also by the Ohio Constituion, to be able to think clearly.

    • RussellLHJR

      What the hoplophobes (gun-a-phobes) don’t seem to understand is that the park is actually safer for their children if it is known to be populated by armed, law abiding citizens. Nothing at all is stopping a crazy person from walking into that park and going on a shooting rampage, but history is quite clear on this…the shooters prefer places where guns are banned. Period. They tend to avoid places where people are armed, and can fight back. So it really is an “unreasonable fear” of guns. Seriously…listen to the reactions. “Oh my goodness, think of the children! You insensitive cad! You exposed a gun to those poor children! They are now scarred for life!”

      Hogwash! They are scarred for life by having phobics for parents who push their own unreasonable fears off on their children. Let’s do the math. What are the odds that a mad gunman will charge the park now that guns are allowed in the park? What are the odds that a pedophile will attempt to abduct a child from said park, when guns are present? What are the odds that somebody will try to rob anyone there? And not just this park, but any park.

      Also, this isn’t any different than how the Liberals push for gay marriage, or separation of church and state, even where their views are not welcome. Funny how they then think that their little holes in the wall should be subject only to what they want, regardless of the law.

      • http://comradealan.com/ Alan Pugh

        “What are the odds that a mad gunman will charge the park now that guns are allowed in the park?”

        First, how often did this ever happen before the law changed?

        Second, uh… since we’ve made it legal to do exactly that, I’d say the odds have increased. However, it’s cool–those of us who don’t want to live in the wild west will just have to find safer places to hang out while you guys have your shootouts.

        “What are the odds that a pedophile will attempt to abduct a child from said park, when guns are present?”

        You win this one. Since parents are generally concerned with the safety of their children, they will be less likely to take them to the new public shooting range, so there will be less opportunities for pedophiles. Good job.

        “Also, this isn’t any different than how the Liberals push for gay marriage, or separation of church and state, even where their views are not welcome.”

        Marriage equality never resulted in someone getting their head blown off for grabbing a cell phone out of their pocket because some paranoid, overzealous, mentally unstable gunman decided to “defend himself.”

        • Pablo Jones

          Wow a bunch of random statements backed up by nothing. That really makes a convincing case.

        • RussellLHJR

          Alan, I can only say that critical thinking is not your strong suit.

          1st, how many times had Sandy Hook, the Colorado movie theater, Columbine High School, etc., been charged by mad gunman before it actually happened? I’ll help you out with that critical thinking thingy…zero times. But, in every case, those places were areas where it was illegal to carry a gun.

          Now, to the 2nd point of yours that just doesn’t cut it. Your assumption is that by allowing guns in the park, it is now more dangerous. Again, for those who don’t seem to understand simple concepts…law abiding citizens are very unlikely to use their guns to commit a crime. That’s why they are law abiding, in case that fact got by you, which apparently it has. Criminals have never cared what the law says…only what they can get away with.

          Gun free zones are not gun free zones, if and when somebody chooses to commit a crime. Captain Obvious, you aren’t because you don’t seem to understand that fact…the fact that gun free zones are where the crimes tend to happen. But even the criminally insane seem to be able to work out the obvious fact that gun free zones will allow them to go out with a huge bang…or possibly even create a big bang and get away, in theory.

          Third, you don’t know history. The wild wild west was only wild in dime store novels. Adding up all of the murders throughout the years that the “wild west” was supposedly wild, and applying it to the per capita of just one year, any year during that time, the murder rate is far below Major cities in the U.S., especially those that were declared gun free zones, such as Chicago or New York. In short, the wild west wasn’t wild. It was pretty tame compared to most major U.S. cities today. People were too busy trying to survive, and guns made it less likely for those who chose to commit a crime.

          Basically, all that you have proven with your post is that you, and people like you actually do have an unreasonable fear of law abiding citizens carrying guns. In short, people like you are phobics. If people like you don’t take your child to the park because law abiding citizens can carry guns, and you think that actually makes you less safe, your child has far more to worry about than guns. Hopefully they will learn to use logic and common sense where their parents failed to do so.

  • Janae Kuzawa

    As an update to attendance numbers… there actually ended up being over 20 pro-gun activists and over 30 anti-gun activists at the park. We ended up having multiple conversations… some hot and heated, some calm and rational… I find it interesting that at least 2 “anti-gun” attendees are now considering getting the training for their CHLs, if not actually purchasing a firearm, yet.

    • DAHernandez

      Bullshit. According to Fox News, you don’t even live there and only stirred up this controversy to make a point that we should all bow to the almighty gun. You’re not gonna be happy until we’re all gunned up to the hilt. And don’t start with that an-armed-society-is-a-polite-society crap. If that were true, the US would be the most polite and safe society in the world. It’s far from that. We lead the industrialized world on gun death rates by a startling multiple. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/chart-the-u-s-has-far-more-gun-related-killings-than-any-other-developed-country/

      And the states with the highest rate of gun ownership also have the highest rate of gun deaths. http://www.vpc.org/press/0905gundeath.htm

      • Larry Crnobrnja

        I might remind you that Martin Luther King, Jr wasn’t from Selma, Alabama. Do you consider him just a trouble maker?

        • Bob Owens

          He didn’t come with guns either.

          • Larry Crnobrnja

            I get it, you think guns are bad. But how would you feel if the City of Oberlin passed an ordinance that stated blacks weren’t allowed in the parks?

          • http://comradealan.com/ Alan Pugh

            That is the worst kind of irrelevant and pointless statement I’ve seen on this site.

          • Larry Crnobrnja

            The right to carry in the park is protected by law and state supreme court rulings; a city doesn’t have the authority to change that right. My question is spot on, even though you can’t come up with a decent response.

          • Janae Kuzawa

            He couldn’t GET a gun… his licence was denied because he was black… Gun control was used to control the minority populations ability to defend themselves from aggressive, overreaching police and bigoted citizens. Come to think of it, all of the excessive taxes on firearms and ammunition STILL overwhelmingly hurt Americans of African decent, along with all the other working poor who would possibly be able to provide for their own defense if not for prices inflated by said taxes.

          • SchoolsOut1

            give it a rest Janae… if you want to go off on a tangent about the working poor– how about those that choose to not work, and are actually making a better living than those that you so pointedly call the “working poor”… something is assbackwards in your liberal thinking-

          • BriKuz

            No, idiot, my wife’s comment was about the fact that gun control was used in the past to keep blacks from owning guns, and that today, excessive excise taxes ALSO hinder the ability of lower income people from buying a firearm. Read the article, I don’t think my wife and I would fall into your “liberal” description…

      • Pablo Jones

        And the cities with the highest gun crime are cities that have the strictest gun laws. And the majority of crimes that involve guns those guns are illegally obtained. Very few gun crimes are committed by legal gun owners.

        • bmiller107

          Cities with highest gun crime in the U.S. are (in order of incidences): Detroit, Baltimore, New Orleans, Oakland, Memphis, Cleveland, Philadelphia, KS City, Chicago, Milwaukee and Tulsa. How many of them ban guns?

          • 2111

            Three out of the eleven? That is just a guess though, what’s the actual number?

          • Pablo Jones

            6 of the top 10 states with the strictest gun control laws are in the top 15 states with the most fire arm murders.

            Maryland ranked #7 strictest gun state
            California ranked #1 strictest gun state
            Pennsylvania ranked #10 strictest gun state
            Illinois ranked # 9 Strictest

            A lot of good those gun laws are doing those cities.

          • SchoolsOut1

            do you have a statistic as to how many of these gun crimes are committed with legal guns? Remember the old adage: “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns”.

        • http://comradealan.com/ Alan Pugh

          On a larger scale, the countries with the most liberal gun laws have the highest violent crime rates, and vice versa. Look at Australia’s control on weapons and the subsequent massive drop in violent crime.

          • Pablo Jones

            That’s an apples to oranges comparison. Countries and cultures are not similar therefore you can’t make any correlation between them. Using your same logic you could say a country with liberal romen noodle and sushi consumption leads to higher suicide rates in Japan compared to the Congo.

          • http://comradealan.com/ Alan Pugh

            It’s gun laws vs gun violence in two exceptionally similar cultures. Ramen noodles vs. suicide? I have a feeling you’re upvoting your own posts.

          • Pablo Jones

            In what way are you considering them exceptionally similar? Is this like your other comments where you just say what you think and therefore it is fact?

          • http://comradealan.com/ Alan Pugh

            Are you actually trying to enter a debate about whether Australia’s culture is heavily a Western culture?

            I’m just going to Google “Australia’s culture” right quick and copy/paste the first result…

            Hmm, here’s Wikipedia: “The culture of Australia is essentially a Western culture…”

            This isn’t a real debate.

          • RussellLHJR

            Australia has seen a marked increase in many forms of violent crime. Liberals there try to claim that it is just an increase in reporting. Bwahahahahahaahaha! I should note that when they claim that, they can’t offer any proof that there is an increase in rate of reporting of these crimes.

      • Pablo Jones

        So they don’t have a right to comment or demonstrate against the laws because they don’t live there? Well you don’t live there either. So if you don’t think it is right for them why are you making comments?

      • BriKuz

        I personally do NOT CARE if YOU own a firearm or not. NOT my concern. If you choose other means to defend yourself, or no means at all, that is YOUR choice, not mine.

        Now, I would invite you to broaden your horizons a little. Compare the rates of violent crime in developed countries. Using England and Wales as an example, the rate of violent crime is on the close order of 2 times higher in England/Wales, this with MUCH more restrictive gun laws. Now, remove the cities in the USA with the HIGHEST amount of restrictions on lawful gun ownership (Chicago, NYC, LA, etc) and you will find that the rates of violent crime are even MORE skewed. I will allow you to see if you can throw off your bias and actually research this information for yourself, and not just find the numbers that reinforce your world-view.

        • SchoolsOut1

          I’d say if we removed the voters from the cities of Chicago, NYC and LA– we’d have a much better country… Thanks for bringing this up!

          • BriKuz

            Removing a LEGAL voter is as asinine as “adding” dead voters… EVERY CITIZEN has a voice in our government, even if their opinion goes against YOURs… or mine…

  • Chuck

    This story says:
    “With the exception of one brief exchange, the two sides didn’t meet or talk.”
    Nothing could be further from the truth, and this is a classic example of half-assed reporting and lying by omission in order to present your agenda as “news”

    I sat in my lawn chair and had a very decent and productive discussion with Oberlin residents who oppose the state law after the radical attention seekers that you championed had left the scene. We spoke civilly for well over and hour and more likely two. We ended with handshakes, hugs, and best wishes all around.

    Reporting like this only serves to divide the citizenry and promote the violation of civil rights, which I suspect is the real agenda behind this reporter.

    That said, please consider this
    While a gun may be used to murder someone, reporting like this can be used to start a war, or promote civil insurrection. Which should be regulated more?
    Which is more likely to cause damage to society as a whole?

    You should be ashamed of this story, but I suspect you have no shame.
    Therefore, I will be ashamed for you.

    Sincerely,
    Chuck

    • SchoolsOut1

      Chuck– thank-you for a very sensible post… While the Trayvon murder was bad, it took an overzealous, pot-stirring media to turn it into a national circus. It is the media that is the biggest problem in this country.

  • Pete

    Did the “over 20″ have their foil hats on? Why is it such a big deal to advertise they carry a gun? Do they even know the definition of conceal? Funny how this all started with a gun hugger calling the police to inform them that he is going to break the law instead of going through the proper channels to have it change, guess making a big scene is more important.

    • dnoice

      You can’t break a law that is invalid and illegal.

      • Pete

        Than why did he call first? He knew he was doing something that was going to cause trouble. He went to the park to start something, not to enjoy it.

        • dnoice

          The invalid law was/is still on the books.
          He called ahead to make sure the police knew not to attempt to charge him with breaking an invalid law.
          He did the city a favor by preventing a situation where he would have been able to sue the city for a civil rights violation under both state and federal law.
          Had the city simply followed state law and repealed the invalid and illegal ordinance about guns in parks, without all the bluster, you and I probably wouldn’t be typing here.

        • SchoolsOut1

          Sounds like a typical liberal post– it is okay if the shoe is on the other foot.

    • Pablo Jones

      To conceal the weapon they need their CCW permit, which I’m sure most of them probably have. But you don’t need a permit to carry a gun in the open and they aren’t required to conceal anything.

  • Chuck

    Please allow me to try it again, as it appears this site doesn’t accept criticism of their version of “truth”

    This story says: “With the exception of one brief exchange, the two sides didn’t meet or talk.”

    While this video shows quite the opposite
    http://youtu.be/MWqZp68ZNQg
    We conversed decently and civilly for well over an hour and quite probably two.

    • Chuck

      Thank you for restoring my original comment.
      I think you should issue a correction to the story,,,,

  • Paul Facinelli

    The gun-toters who descended upon Oberlin were being needlessly provocative, taking delight, no doubt, in frightening and discomforting the “liberal pantywaists,” whom they view with overt and sneering disdain. That there were families there, children, meant nothing to these bullies. They were there to flaunt the rights bestowed upon them by the malfeasant Ohio Legislature. Yeah. Show them pointy-heads what-for. Tee-hee, tee-hee. What a bunch of orifices.

    • dnoice

      For an example of provocateurism, I submit your above post.

      AFTER we were there, there were families and children happily playing in the park. One father asked me if he should be worried about ‘that guy who was flailing his hands’ in the air. I told him no. I was pretty sure he was unarmed.

    • oldruss

      I suppose those who descended upon lunch counters in the South to protest their segregationist policies were being provocative and took delight, no doubt, in frightening and discomforting the white patrons. Sometimes it is necessary to participate in peaceful civil disobedience when demanding constituional rights that are being denied.

      • Paul Facinelli

        You’re comparing the smug, childish actions by the, uh, gun enthusiasts in Oberlin with the civil rights activism of the 60′s when remarkably brave individuals risked their lives and, at times, gave their lives for their cause. My, aren’t you special.

        • Larry Crnobrnja

          So the 2nd Amendment isn’t worth fighting for in your opinion? My, aren’t you special.

          • http://comradealan.com/ Alan Pugh

            How many of these protesters are part of well-regulated militias?

          • Larry Crnobrnja

            Could be some of them or all of them. Did you bother to ask them?

          • BriKuz

            The Constitution of the State of Ohio says, in Article 1, Section 4: The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be kept up; and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

            How do you think that the people’s right to bear arms in the State of Ohio has ANYTHING to do with “militia,” organized or otherwise? In our state, people have the right to bear arms PERIOD, no caveats.

          • Smira29595

            And what is the militia?? The founding fathers (George Mason) Said it was the whole of the people except a few politicians. And BTW I am a member

        • oldruss

          I was responding, Mr. Facinelli, to your condescending characterization of those who chose to exercise their constitutional rights to carry a firearm, even in the Holy City of Oberlin. And while there may be a difference between the Civil Rights movement of the sixties and the current struggle to maintain Second Amendment rights, the defense of either should not be subjected to the kind of ridicule in which you engaged.

  • dnoice

    This event lasted 3 hours and most of the media and ‘officials’ of the city were only there a very short time. We have hours of audio and video of our discussion with citizens, with very few raised voices.

    There were some folks unwilling to have any rational, adult conversation, such as this lady: http://www.ohionets.com/stuff/oberlin/Go-Away.mp3
    I tried to tell her we all should have the CHOICE to be armed wherever we may be. It didn’t work out so well. :)

    • Pablo Jones

      She was talking about the founding and history of Oberlin. I wonder how many members of the Oberlin underground railroad had guns within the city of Oberlin. Would she have been against them as well?

      I could see her being an active member of the community 50 years ago telling black people to stay out of Oberlin that they should just go somewhere else and that Oberlin was founded for white people.

  • Bob Owens

    The second amendment people wren’t even from Oberlin.

    • Janae Kuzawa

      several of them were, along with some from Wellington and Elyria

    • Pete

      Bob, they had no intention to use the park for enjoyment. It was a political statement and nothing else.

      • Janae Kuzawa

        lol well, we had a LOT of fun with the kids, even dodging some rather asinine, derogatory comments made towards us AND our kids…

        • Pete

          So you’re the type to drag your kids to your little protests are you? Did you happen to tell them you weren’t taking them to be good parents but to be pawns in your little instigation? Now I see why you feel the need to carry a gun,to protect your kids from the people you aggitate unjustly that are out for a peaceful day at the park or whereever you feel the need to push your political agenda.

          • dnoice

            Now THAT’S FUNNY right there!
            Political agenda? Using children as pawns?
            What? Like Obama did?
            These people brought their children, as did I, because they are good parents and have the ability to protect those children should something happen.
            My 15-year-old was open carrying today. He has been shooting for years and understands the levels of threat were deadly force can be used.
            He also knows that getting into a slap fight with some anti-gun weenie does not meet those standards.

          • Pablo Jones

            Pete would you have a problem if gay rights activists were using the park? If they groping and kissing over each other would you say they were there for political reasons and were just trying to aggitate unjustly the straight people that were out for a peaceful day at the park?

          • Pete

            If they have a sign stating that sexual contact is not allowed then yes. The gun huggers were not out for a peaceful day at the park. They targeted that park due to the gun ban and that is it. They will never be back if the signs come down.

          • Larry Crnobrnja

            They targeted that park because of the unconstitutional ordinance in Oberlin. They should be praised.

      • Heath J

        If the city of Oberlin had any respect for state law, we wouldn’t have been there. Hell, since when, especially in that town, is it a Bad Thing to express political dissent? Bloody hypocrites.

        Suppose the park had sign saying “No dogs or Irish”, “No Coloreds”, or “No homosexuals”? That would be national news, but since liberals don’t like the 2nd Amendment, it’s OK to discriminate against that one.

        And yes, I do live 2 miles from Oberlin proper.

        • SchoolsOut1

          Right on Heath!

      • Chuck

        Attention!
        According to Pete, political statements are no longer allowed in Oberlin!
        That is all,,,,

      • RussellLHJR

        That’s irrelevant.

    • Smira29595

      Kinda like the protesters from Oberlin that keep showing up in Youngstown to protest fracking………….

  • Char

    Actually, both sides talked for almost two hours. But you must have left before that. Good discussions were had, even though I believe no minds were changed. But cool heads, civility and mutual respect were the abundant features of the day. I was there until most of the people left after 2pm.

    • Janae Kuzawa

      I don’t know which side of the issue you fell on, but I agree… we had a LOT of civil discourse, between BOTH sides… and actually found a huge amount of common ground… My husband and I would BOTH like to thank those who chatted civilly on the matter.

  • keepsmewonderin

    Welcome to the wild,wild west. The whole gun toting mentality is nothing but a reverse mind frame towards society.

    • Smira29595

      I will keep you wondering. I am the woman standing next to you at Giant Eagle, I might be the one at the table across from you in a restaurant. I am in front of you at the bank. I am a nondescript woman everywhere. I am 50 years old an I carry every day every where, except in your Gun free zones aka victim zones. If you put me in with 10 other women I would be the last one you picked. So you keep wondering and I will be there.

      • Char

        Well, I guarantee you’re not carrying in that bank.

        • Smira29595

          Yes I am unless the Bank has a sign it is perfectly legal…………

        • Smira29595

          PNC has no sign, Most First Place allow. First Merit is the only one I now has a sign and they have been robbed more………. Guess the criminals don’t care

          • Pete

            Mansfield Police release picture of suspect, car in PNC bank robbery
            Warren Reporter-Aug 28, 2013
            MANSFIELD TWP. — Mansfield Police have released the surveillance photograph of the suspect in yesterday’s robbery of PNC Bank on Route …
            +Show moreShow less
            Mansfield Township police release photos of PNC Bank robber …
            The Express Times – LehighValleyLive.com-Aug 28, 2013
            Man Sought in Mansfield Bank Robbery
            Patch.com-Aug 28, 2013
            all 3 news sources »
            Report: PNC bank robbed on Route 57 in Mansfield Township
            Warren Reporter-Aug 27, 2013
            MANSFIELD — A PNC Bank was robbed around 10:30 a.m. today on Route 57 in Mansfield Township, according to The Express-Times.
            +Show moreShow less
            Mansfield Township bank robbed on Route 57, police confirm
            The Express Times – LehighValleyLive.com-Aug 27, 2013
            Man Claimed to Have Weapon in Mansfield Bank Robbery, Report …
            Patch.com-Aug 27, 2013
            all 3 news sources »
            PNC Bank robbery investigated on Beachland Boulevard in Vero …
            WPTV-Aug 30, 2013
            VERO BEACH — Police apprehended a bank robbery suspect within minutes of the crime Friday morning, spokesman Officer John Morrison …

            Gloucester City man robbed PNC Bank at gunpoint, authorities say
            The Bridgeton News – NJ.com-Aug 16, 2013
            GLOUCESTER CITY — Police on Thursday arrested a city man they say robbed a local bank at gunpoint that morning
            Yep, I can see how allowing guns has stopped robbers. And this was just a very small section.

          • Smira29595

            I was talking about in Elyria where I happen to live, and had a permit holer been present may not have happened BTW:

            www(dot)freerepublic.com/focus/news/3055942/posts

            Aug 17, 2013 … Woman with Concealed Carry
            Permit Stops 6 Robbers in Houston …. Oh, wait,
            that was an earlier robbery – one of several that have occurred
            at …

            www(dot)easybakegunclub.com/news/1887/3-shot-during-attempted-robbery-in-Lockla…

            Dec 10, 2012 … Homeowner stops robbery with
            an unloaded shotgun (Tyler Tx) … Tags: Lockland , Ohio,
            defensive gun use, concealed carry, ccw, cwp, …

            www(dot)thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-371297.html

            If you enjoyed reading about “CCW stops Michigan
            bank robbery” here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you’ll ….. This
            is going to catch some flames, but oh well.

          • Smira29595

            My last post was halted, I provided links but search CCW holder stops robbery you will find plenty I found 6,430,000 results. I was talking about the robberies of banks in Elyria but hey good work C&P ing………… Just remember I may be in front of you at Giant Eagle and you will never know who it is. 78,000 Permits were issed in 2012 Alone. WE ARE EVERYWHERE. And there streets are still not running Red with blood, Even though restaurant/ bar Carry has been in effect almost 2 years………… IT is NOT the law abiding gun owners you need to worry about………..

          • Chuck

            Which of those was a legal gun carrier, Pete?

      • keepsmewonderin

        I don’t want to know paranoia.

        • Smira29595

          I am not paranoid I am just not in denial. And if you had read I have already been a victim once. NEVER again.

    • Larry Crnobrnja

      Of course the argument is we have a society because of the guns we carried and still carry.

    • Joe Smith

      You do know all those shootouts in the Wild West were terribly exaggerated by dime store novels etc and shootings were not that common don’t you?

  • Mike wowk

    I didn’t see on the news last night or in this story anywhere how many people were killed because there were a few legal guns in the park? Were the streets of Oberlin running red with the blood of innocent victims? Just curious.

    • Pete

      No more than the days when the gun huggers weren’t there. How many times you think they’ll return to the park if the law changes? I’m better never, They will take their guns and pawns(kids) and never be seen again. They cry about the 2nd Amendment but it was never affected, no where does it say they have the right to carry it where ever they want, just that they can bear arms.
      By the way, how do you like you boy Zimmerman now? Typical gun nut.

      • BriKuz

        My personal opinion, which many of my peers disagree with, is that GZ is a POWER-SEEKING nutcase. It is a good thing he never made it onto a police force, for many innocents would have been harmed. Also, our kids are not pawns… we go to the park EVERY weekend (well, unless the weather is bad) and we go armed wherever we go. For my wife and I, this is NOT a political game… this is what we do and who we are: Two responsible parents who provide for our children’s protection at ALL times, as is our right and duty. Its not OUR fault that someone got a picture of we we do constantly and plastered it all over the news. But, them having done so DOES show that a happy, well-adjusted, successful family can have a good time together… is that what you’re REALLY mad about? We don’t fit the stereotype of a typical “gun hugger”? Will seeing more and more young, moral, successful families burst too many bubbles?

    • bmiller107

      I’ve never seen a story on the news about people being robbed or killed in Oberlin Park before people knew there were legal guns in the park.

      It must be an awful dangerous, scary place if people need to take their guns to it. Maybe they should try going to a safer park in the area.

      • Smira29595

        Wasn’t there a rash of hate crimes soooooo bad in Oberlin they had to close the college down for a day???? KKK scrawling racist comments all over the place???? Oh yeah it was liberals perpetrating a hoax………..

        • Pete

          Kinda like gun huggers crying wolf at a park that is safe and crime free without the need for guns.

          • Heath J

            Except one was a hoax and the other was Liberals breaking the law. Idiot.

            The city of Oberlin can either conform to state law or lose face and money in court. I don’t care, as either way I win.

            If those fools would’ve respected the law, we wouldn’t have been there, and our presence would’ve gone unnoticed. Our weapons would’ve remained concealed, and then you could go on pretending all was flowers and sunshine in the world, ignorant of badguys and scary people exercising their rights.

            Pete, I only post this for the record. You obviously have an agenda or are to dense to be taken seriously ( I suspect the latter, no sane person spends that much time trolling a comment section) This is for anyone else that wades through the garbage you spew wherever this issue pops up.

          • Pete

            No Heather, it is you fools with the agenda. That park was just fine without you gun huggers. The park being gun free was not hurting anyone but you couldn’t just pass up the chance to stick your noses where it didn’t belong. I see you’re to stupid to realize that not everybody is as insecure as you gun totting radicals.

          • Larry Crnobrnja

            And the park will probably be in compliance with state law, thanks to those “gun huggers”. Maybe you should thank them for that?

          • Pete

            Who cares if they are in compliance when it allows guns into it? It doesn’t make the park any nicer. Did they actually ask the majority of Oberlin residents(the ones that pay for the upkeep on it) if they wanted guns allowed?

          • Larry Crnobrnja

            So you’re okay if a community votes to ban blacks or gays or Muslims?

          • Smira29595

            So you only believe we should enforce laws YOU like aren’t you special…….

          • Chuck

            Did they actually ask the residents of Oberlin whether they wanted a Catholic Church in town?

          • Heath J

            If it helps you sleep better at night, whatever.

            Oh, and we trounced the S#$% out of your kind in Colorado yesterday. :D

            Welcome to the wrong side of the argument.

          • BriKuz

            The park WASN’T “gun free” since 2007. Removing this ordinance quite possibly saved the city and individual officers tens of thousands of dollars from a potential civil rights lawsuit should anyone have been illegally detained or arrested under this illegal ordinance.

  • Pete

    Hey “gun huggers”!! I see you hero, George Zimmerman, just got arrested for threatening his wife with his gun. Let’s see who backs him or throws himj to the wolves. First he gets her to lie about during the trial and now that he’s got no more use for her he threatens her. What a perfect person for the NRA poster.

    • Smira29595

      Do you own a fire extinquisher????

      • Pete

        Are you really going to use that argument? You can’t be that stupid. Handguns are one of very few inventions that had death as it’s main purpose. Don’t show your ignorance with such idiotic comparisons.

        • Smira29595

          How out PROTECTION from those that would cause me or my family harm.

        • Smira29595

          I am in my 50′s Husband Is in his 60′s My mother 70′s Sister 40′s Daughter 20′s we all have a CHL we are around you and you’ll never know it…………… You are in no danger if you mean us none.

          • Pete

            Who’s out there to cause you harm? Point them out to all of us. Will you kill an innocent person like Zimmerman did? You say I wouldn’t be able to pick you out of a crowd? Yes I could, you’d be the arrogant one thinking guns are the answer to all your problems. I know dozens of people who have a CHL yet they don’t need to throw it in peoples faces. They are responsible adults, unlike Brian and “his crew”.

          • Smira29595

            Well since I have been the victim of a violent crime……….. My ex moved 2 doors away threatened multiple time to “blow my brains out” the Courts would not give me a restraining order because he said it to friend and it was just ” Hearsay” and allowed him to continually harass me. Police did nothing. He would trap me in my car when I pulled in the drive. The ONLY people who would help and that was Lorain County Sheriff. They felt it was serious enough to grant me the first emergency temporary CHL in the county, while I waited on the regular.

          • 2111

            Mr. Zimmerman did not kill an innocent person the incident has been ruled a justifiable homicide. We all have the right to defend ourselves when being assaulted. You might have missed the trial or don’t like the American process of letting a jury decide trials to come up with your conclusion that Mr. Zimmerman killed an innocent person. Much like you don’t value the rights of others, our constitution or state laws that don’t fit your lifestyle, how tolerant and open minded of you.

    • Zen Grouch

      Yeah, that’s too bad about Zimmerman beating his wife then shoving a gun down his father-in-law’s throat so far it broke out a dozen teeth…

      Oh, wait a minute, none of that’s been proved in court, other than the court of ignorant public opinion.

      • Heath J

        Which more often then not, is based on something resembling bovine excrement, but who am I to judge?

        • Heath J

          Hell, if Pete is representative of said court, I want nothing to do with it.

          • Zen Grouch

            I’d bet more than even money Pete and his kind are more than happy to get that jury notice in the mail…

          • Heath J

            That’s what scares me about the “judged by a jury of your peers” thing sometimes. He obviously has an ax to grind, and the actual legality of a thing be damned…

          • Zen Grouch

            Great Shades of O.J.!!!

    • Smira29595

      I will ask again. Do you own a fire extinguisher?? If
      so why we pay taxes so our cities have fire departments to come an
      put out a fire for you. So why bother??????

      • Pete

        My insurance is cheaper if I have them in my house. Do you have any? You’re still acting stupid I see.

        • Smira29595

          You are a real ” big man” you may not need a firearm to feel like one but trying to pretend you have superior knowledge and believing you can impose your will on others. You are actually a sad little man. Carrying & or owning a firearm is MY right it your right not to carry if you so desire. You do not know me, my education, or my level of training.
          .

    • Joe Smith

      As usual, anti gunners “jump the gun” He was not arrested and she has shown to lie once already, she sure wouldn’t lie a second time right before the divorce proceeding they are about to go through so she can get him in court, nope THAT wouldn’t happen

      • Pete

        You’re right Joe, jumped the gun on that one, he was detained. Only reason he was released is because she decided if she wants to live she better not file. Fact is that he hit her father and threatend her. By the way, nice try but I own a few guns. I just don’t need to strap one on to be a man. Break into my house and you leave with your choice of slug, buckshot, or .22 Winchester magnum.

        • Larry Crnobrnja

          “Fact is that he hit her father and threatend her.”

          Really? That’s a fact? Looks like you’re making another rush judgement, Pete. You appear to have a history of developing opinions based on nothing.

        • Joe Smith

          I missed the part where she said the only reason she didn’t file was because she wanted to live. Killing her for that would be against what we have seen from Zim since the only time he killed so far that we are aware of was in self defense. You go ahead and leave your guns at home for because you are such a “man”, since you don’t understand what carrying a firearm is for it’s best you don’t carry one until you do. Why is your life worth protecting at home but not out in public? I have a knife wound across my chest that woke me up to the reason to carry, I hope you don’t find out the hard way like I did. Good luck to you and your family.

          • Pete

            A lot good that gun did to protect you from getting cut. Guess you froze when it came to mcrunch time. I suggest you leave your gun in a safe at home so no one comes up and just takes it from you. This is why people don’t need to carry weapons, no life experience and would freeze when confronted.

          • Joe Smith

            I didn’t have the gun at that time as I was in Chicago where self defense is almost a crime and as a former deputy, I could likely handle a situation by not freezing better than you could. The fact that I am alive means I won in the situation, you can’t expect to go through any fight unscathed. If I had been armed, I would not have the scar on my chest which could have been fatal if was deeper. I am not going to keep wasting time debating you as I know for a fact that I am right as I have lived the lifestyle long enough to know. Enjoy your life Pete ol boy and again, I hope you never find out how wrong you are and you and your family remain safe. The beauty of the 2nd amendment is that you can CHOOSE if you want to carry or not, I don’t care if you carry or not as long as my rights are left alone. Again, good luck to you and yours.

    • Chuck

      Tell us another one Pinocchio,
      Seems there was no gun involved in the Zimmerman divorce fiasco
      Careful you don’t trip over the truth while you are jerking your knee to the latest media fairy tale, Pete,,,,

  • Bob Owens

    One of my greatest concerns growing up in Oberlin were the tyrannical squirrels and rabbits in the parks. That’s what it’s about. They couldn’t care less about how much $ Oberlin spends to defend the law. Tyranny. They want to show that they are there to defend the tyranny.

    • BriKuz

      The tyranny is trying to relieve someone of their god-given/natural (depends on your outlook) duty to provide for their own protection. I find it funny that members of the City Council have CHLs, yet they would ban YOU and I from making the decision to carry or not. I guess some people are just more equal than others…

  • Pete

    I see not one of the protesters replied about ever returning to the park. They only care about their agenda. They never took into account what the citizens of Oberlin wanted. Maybe they are better off worring about crime in Ashland since ,percapita, more rapes/robberies/assaults/burglaries/theft are higher in Ashland. Police your own towns before worring about others.

    • BriKuz

      My wife and I will be visiting the park on a regular basis… We’ll also be patronizing local businesses. The same with Oberlin residents who carry… (not every “gun hugger,” as you so succinctly put it, at the park was from out of town.)

      If the people of Ashland voted an Ordinance to ban gays, lesbians, public breastfeeding, or people with dyed purple hair, would YOU, Pete, not fight for what was right, what was protected by Ohio Law and the Ohio State Constitution? (This may be a bad analogy, as I would be fighting WITH you, not against on that type of illegal legislation) At its core, this is NOT a gun rights issue. This is a “follow the law of the State” issue.

      • Heath J

        The silence is deafening, my friend.

        Because It’s about his personal agenda, not the law.

        Once again, welcome to the wrong side of the argument, Pete. Go back 50 years, and I have little doubt that you’d be whining about desegregating drinking fountains.

        • Pete

          Hey Heath? How stupid can youi really be? Don’t answer that, just because someone doesn’t believe in your outdated agenda doesn’t mean it’s the wrong side. You and your idiot friends here will find it interesting that I have a CCW. I just don’t need to force my beliefs down other peoples throat.
          Funny how you guys crack on Liberals when you act just like them, puching your believes on others.

          • Heath J

            Whatever you have to tell yourself to make the slide into irrelevance easier…

            And nice try with the ” I have a CCW” gambit. So does Diane Feinstein.

          • BriKuz

            What in Heath’s or my argument could be taken to mean “force an idea down your throat?” I couldn’t care less whether or not YOU carry, or in what way YOU choose to provide for your own defense. Its NOT MY business, just as it is not YOUR business how I choose to provide for MY family’s protection. The core here is that, although the State Constitution provides for home rule, there ARE limits on that provision, just as there are limits on the right to bear arms. All three branches of the Ohio Government, bloated as it may be, have formed a fairly simple balance between RTKBA and home rule…

    • BriKuz

      We were at the park for a couple hours last weekend… I’ll be there again this evening… Also, it’s not MY job to police my community, or any other… merely to provide for my family’s protection.

  • http://comradealan.com/ Alan Pugh

    Thanks for demonstrating those additional similarities.