I’ve spent over half of my life in Ohio, and I’ve learned that Cincinnati is a bizarre and interesting place. It is the city that’s spent the last ten years trying to run out Larry Flynt, while electing Jerry Springer mayor. It is also the city that, until 1999, had a professional baseball team that banned facial hair. Alas, since the acquisition of Ken Griffey Jr., they’ve waived that rule and replaced it with one banning starting pitching, but I digress.

Cincinnati just got a lot more interesting Wednesday, when the Ohio first District Court of Appeals ruled on Klein v. Leis, a challenge to the concealed weapons prohibition in Ohio. The case was filed by, among others, a pizza delivery driver who was arrested for having a pistol on his belt during his deliveries. Thanks to the Court of Appeals, from now on, he’ll be packing heat in more than that little heated bag, since the court determined that the state’s prohibition on carrying concealed weapons infringes on one’s constitutional right to self-defense.

Presiding Judge Mark Painter pontificates in his opinion, claiming that he is unable to determine the “efficacy” of people carrying concealed weapons, but is willing to inform us that “We are America, where the Pilgrims shot their Thanksgiving turkeys.”

He may even be right, though in my more cynical vision of the first Thanksgiving, we probably forced Squanto to kill the turkey and then used our muskets to shoot him.

Painter also mentions an Ohio regulation, that he upholds as justifiable, banning those with disabilities (ranging from drug addicts, convicted felons, and mental incompetents) as being “properly” restricted from possessing guns.

Here’s a huge problem. Why do I no longer have a right to defend myself if I happen to be convicted of embezzlement? Certainly social contracts have been broken, but does my felonious behavior take away this apparently fundamental right? In Painter’s eyes, yes, giving Cincinnati and Hamilton County a convenient way to force felons out of town.

That’s not the only problem, either. The Ohio statute already gave exemptions for individuals who believed themselves to be in need of defense. The only real complaint Painter could have is with the order of the judicial proceedings, since people had to wait until trial to produce evidence of innocence. But instead, he has appointed himself high priest of Hamilton County, and given me the right to carry a .44 magnum into Forest Fair Mall.

The decision not only offends the rights of those of us who don’t care to be shot, but also private business owners. Since Painter has christened this right to conceal weapons as fundamental, private business owners will have to show a compelling interest to have people with concealed weapons ejected from their businesses. The problem is the only way they’ll have such a compelling interest is if the concealed weapon carrier has already robbed them or shot someone.

To be honest, if the right to self-defense is that all-encompassing, why not go further? I should be able to carry a rocket launcher around the streets of Cincinnati, or maybe wire myself to a Palestinian-style suicide bomb. Sorry, but in a society where everyone has the right to carry a Beretta under his jacket or a .44 magnum in her purse, I wouldn’t feel well defended with a handgun.

I highly recommend the reading of Klein v. Leis for both gun-haters and gun nuts everywhere. It’s good for a laugh to anyone who’s ever encountered logic, even if it was only during an experimental phase in college.

For now, I’ll just take it as a sign that I don’t really care to move back to Ohio. My right to be free from other people’s self-defense is more than worth it.

Tim Kearns is a senior in political science from Bellevue, Neb.