|
Ruehlman's Rulings
|
"...[T]he very thought a
potential victim might possess a firearm deters that element of our
society that cares nothing about laws or human life..." |
|
|
-- Cincinnati Court of Common Pleas Judge Robert P. Ruehlman |
|
Ohio State Rep.
Jim Alsanides (R-95) |
Readers of the FAX Alert may recall the name Judge Robert Ruehlman. In
1999, Judge Ruehlman dismissed a lawsuit brought by the City of
Cincinnati that tried to hold gun manufacturers accountable for the
city's costs to treat victims of gun violence.
Last week, Judge Ruehlman was back in the news. On January 10, he
declared Ohio's current ban on Right To Carry unconstitutional.
Ohio
Attorney General Betty D. Montgomery (R) then accommodated a request by
the Hamilton County Court of Appeals by issuing a stay forbidding the
ban's enforcement.
|
Robert P. Ruehlman: 48, Miami Heights. Judge, Hamilton County Common Pleas Court. Law degree, University of Cincinnati. Family: wife, Mary Teresa; sons, Rob, Mike, Nick, Dan, Jimmy; daughters, Kate and Liz.
Experience/qualifications: Ten years as a trial lawyer and 14 years as a trial judge. "...All
lawyers know that I move my docket. If you are a litigant, you will receive quick resolution..."
|
In his ruling, Judge Ruehlman noted that Ohio's current prohibition on
Right To Carry is "contrary to their (the plaintiffs') Ohio
Constitutional right." He further commented, "Amidst all the baying
from gun opponents is the irrefutable fact that there will always be
people in our society who refuse to follow any rules and who can never
be reasoned with or rehabilitated."
The Judge's ruling was probably
best summed up when he said, "There is no doubt that the very thought a
potential victim might possess a firearm deters that element of our
society that cares nothing about laws or human life but rather
understands only one thing -- brute force."
The gun ban lobby formerly known as HCI was quick to criticize the
Judge's ruling. In typical knee-jerk reaction, Dennis Hennigan, who
serves as the Director of the Brady Center's Legal Action Project, mused
in a press release, "The judge's ruling runs counter to
common-sense....Unless it is corrected on appeal, this decision not only
places Cincinnati law enforcement at risk, it endangers the lives of
ordinary citizens."
The ruling shed new light on the debate before the Ohio House of
Representatives, as it prepares to vote on HB 274, an NRA-supported bill
that would allow law-abiding citizens to carry a firearm for
self-defense if they meet certain requirements including a background
check and firearm training. Bill sponsor
Rep. Jim Aslanides (R-95),
said he was "elated" by the court's decision, and that it "exemplifies
that we need to construct a bill that is palatable to the citizens of
Ohio."
NRA members in Ohio are urged to contact the Ohio House
Representatives at (614) 466-3357 to voice their support for HB 274.
Members can also find and contact their individual Representative using
the "Write Your Reps" tool at
www.NRAILA.org.
Meanwhile, on January 11, the Associated Press reported the 3rd U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the City of Philadelphia's suit that
sought to hold firearm manufacturers liable for the acts of that city's
criminals. Upholding a federal judge's dismissal of the litigation, the
Court ruled gun makers "are under no legal duty to protect citizens from
the deliberate and unlawful use of their products." As with other city
lawsuits, Philadelphia was
- seeking financial compensation,
- blaming gun
makers for
- including insufficient mechanical safety devices with their
guns,
- "flooding" markets with guns the city claimed would be used by
criminals,
- supplying firearms to disreputable dealers, and
- failing to
mandate that dealers ration gun purchases.
In a story on the
Philadelphia suit, Best's Insurance News
(Jan. 14) notes the court, on
January 11, ruled that "there is a weak causal connection between the
gun manufacturers' conduct and the city's and organizational plaintiffs'
injuries."
Philadelphia officials are mulling yet another wasteful
appeal.
Related Stories...
More About Lawsuits Against Gun-Makers
National Center for Policy Analysis on Judge Ruehlman's 1999 decision
|
|
