Groups prepared to sue Cincinnati over bump stock ban

Two Second Amendment advocacy groups have told Cincinnati they could sue over the bump stock ban passed by City Council Wednesday.

Ohioans for Concealed Carry (OFCC) and the Buckeye Firearms Association have both sent letters to the city suggesting it could face expensive litigation.

On Wednesday, City Council passed an ordinance making it a misdemeanor to use, own or possess "trigger activators" defined as devices that accelerate the rate of fire of guns. Bump stocks are named specifically.

Both firearm groups argue that the ordinance violates Ohio's so-called preemption law enacted in 2007.

The state law states Ohio residents "without further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process, may own, possess, purchase, sell, transfer, transport, store, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition” in accordance with state and federal law.

The Buckeye Firearms Association said the law overrides home rule on the matter of firearms, meaning Ohio cities cannot pass laws tightening or loosening gun regulations established at the state and federal level.

"This really isn't about bump stocks," said Dean Rieck, executive director of the association. "It's about the rule of law in Ohio. Cities can pass all kinds of laws. But they can't pass gun laws. We thought everyone understood that by now, but apparently not. So if we have to sue to once again to make the point, that's exactly what we'll do."

"We have no choice, we have to sue them for this,” Rieck told The Enquirer Thursday.

More: Bump stock ban: If you own a bump stock in Cincinnati, you're now breaking the law

More: Ohio Republicans take up John Kasich's 'commonsense' gun control ideas

More: As Ohio senator, retired Cincinnati officer has credibility on gun control

More: First month free: Subscribe to unlimited digital access to Cincinnati.com

Councilman P.G. Sittenfeld championed the legislation. His office told The Enquirer Thursday in the statement that the city solicitor's office determined firearm "accessories" and "attachments" are not included in the state preemption.

The state law does cover "part[s] of a firearm" and "its components." It may be up to a judge work out the semantics.

"We must do everything within our power to stop the senseless mass shootings and the tragic bloodshed in our country," Sittenfeld's statement said. "Councilmember Sittenfeld believes we also have a moral imperative to act."

In a letter to the city solicitor dated April 16, OFCC said it has been successful in lawsuits against Oberlin and Cleveland regarding preemption.

Philip Mulivor, director of media relations for OFCC, said Sittenfeld was making an "artificial and erroneous distinction" when it comes to bump stocks.

“This is just another example of an Ohio city becoming lawless," Mulivor said.

Mulivor said his organization was keeping its litigation plans secret for the moment, but noted in the past OFCC has "very aggressively sought legal relief.”

“The problem with that is it costs the taxpayers,” Mulivor said. “It’s a very unfair position to put local taxpayers in.”