Legislation may have a different motive
An article on the cover of the Jan. 27 Vindicator titled “Loychik wants Ohio as 2nd Amendment sanctuary,” informed me that my representative in the state legislature believes the rights of gun owners in the state are once again in danger. According to the article, he notes ” … with the current climate and rhetoric at the federal level, the preservation of our Second Amendment is now more crucial than ever before.”
Apart from the fact that the people have elected a Democrat as president, Rep. Loychik cites no evidence for his claim that possible federal laws and executive orders may be forthcoming that will interfere with the rights of law-abiding Ohioans to keep and bear arms. Apparently he has forgotten that despite the devastating mass shootings that took place during the Obama administration, including the massacre of children at Sandy Hook Elementary School, no significant gun restrictions were passed at the federal level.
I have no idea what makes Rep. Loychik think this issue is so important that he has chosen it over all others as the subject of the first bill he ought to bring before the legislature. A cynic might suggest the reason is to burnish his credibility with the constituents he hopes will support him in future elections.
Whatever his motives, it seems to me there are other matters of greater concern to my fellow residents of the 63rd District. While I fully support the rights of responsible gun owners everywhere, I sincerely hope the next piece of legislation my representative decides to promote takes into consideration the well-being of a broader range of Ohio citizens.