Good news for CCW in Ohio

[JackW]

It looks like Ohio's CCW laws are about to change for the better.

First is a pre-emption that disallows more restrictive local laws.
Second is the elimination of the "plain sight" rule while carrying in a vehicle, this is my favorite since I don't live in Ohio, but do pass through on my commute to work.

There are a few problems with the new bill one is "an increased criminal penalty if the person fails to notify an officer that he or she is carrying a concealed gun. The penalty would go from a fourth- to a first-degree misdemeanor, with a two-year gun permit suspension." another is "Eliminating a provision that would allow an intoxicated permit holder to give his or her gun to someone else. Carrying a gun while drunk is a fifth-degree felony."

But all said it is a big step forward for Ohio's CCW and kudos to the Ohioans who fought for the upgrades. See http://ohioccwforums.org/index.php for updates and info on packing in the Buckeye state.

Link to the article:
http://www.columbusdispatch.com/news-story.php?story=229493

CONCEALED CARRY REVISIONS
Patrol, GOP near deal on gun bill
Compromise would supersede local laws
By Jim Siegel
The Columbus Dispatch
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Republican lawmakers and the State Highway Patrol have reached a deal on how guns can be carried in vehicles, perhaps smoothing enactment of a bill that would modify Ohio's concealed-handgun law.

The bill, among other things, no longer would permit local governments to pass gun laws that go beyond the restrictions set by state lawmakers. This includes the assault-weapons ban passed by Columbus officials in the summer of 2005, and prohibitions on guns in parks or other places not designated as gun-free zones in state law. Those local laws would be invalidated.

Gov. Bob Taft had threatened to veto the bill, based on opposition from the patrol, which earlier objected to proposed changes in the way people could conceal guns in their vehicles.

"I think we have a bill that the Second Amendment people support and that law enforcement is OK with," said Sen. Jim Jordan, R-Urbana, chairman of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, which is hearing the bill.

The main fight centered on whether concealed-carry permit holders, while in a vehicle, should be required to carry a gun either holstered in plain view or locked away in a glove box.

If the gun isn't locked away, the patrol wanted the gun in plain sight to protect troopers involved in traffic stops.

But gun-rights advocates, including bill sponsor Rep. James Aslanides, R-Coshocton, argued the plain-sight law caused logistical problems, particularly for women who carry guns in their purses rather than a holster. He also said it created unnecessary safety risks to move a gun from a holster to a glove box.

The patrol now is backing away from its plain-sight requirement in exchange for an increased criminal penalty if the person fails to notify an officer that he or she is carrying a concealed gun. The penalty would go from a fourth- to a first-degree misdemeanor, with a two-year gun permit suspension.

"Our main concern was that if they do away with the plain-sight that we, as law enforcement, wanted to ensure our officers' safety the best that we could," said Lt. Shawn Davis, of the patrol's Office of Strategic Services.

Davis said the patrol will take a neutral stance on the new version of the bill, to be introduced Wednesday, when a committee vote also is scheduled. An earlier version passed the House in March, 76-19.

Taft spokesman Mark Rickel offered no insight into whether the governor would support the revised measure. "It has not been a priority for the governor at this point."

Cities including Columbus have opposed having their gun laws pre-empted by the bill. Aslanides said a permit holder can't be expected to know hundreds of different gun laws.

But a spokesman for Columbus Mayor Michael B. Coleman has said the bill disrespects local control and "the ability of cities of any size to keep people safe."

Other expected changes to the bill:

Eliminating a provision that would allow a person to get a gun permit if his or her criminal record had been expunged.

Eliminating a provision that would allow an intoxicated permit holder to give his or her gun to someone else. Carrying a gun while drunk is a fifth-degree felony.

[email protected]

 

[1911 guy]

It's about time. The real fly in the ointment has been the "plain sight" vehicle provision. I'll be glad to see that go away.

 

[Durruti]

Personally, I feel that the lack of statewide preemption was even worse. Of course, I live in Columbus, so I may be a bit biased

Anyway, sounds like a good deal. Although, anything that the State Highway Patrol is happy with can't be all good

 

[Linda]

Yes, it hopefully will be a great day/week in Ohio. I will attend tomorrow's hearing(s) with my fellow Buckeye Firearms leaders, as I have attended every single hearing on this Bill. We have worked very, very hard on this Bill. Hopefully things will go as planned.

Actually the best place to get the correct information on this revision is http://www.buckeyefirearms.org
We will have something posted on our website soon after the vote.

 

[TexasRifleman]

"Eliminating a provision that would allow an intoxicated permit holder to give his or her gun to someone else.

Does Ohio have some kind of FOID card or something?

I would think that if the receiver were legally eligible to possess a handgun it wouldn't matter much where it came from.

What's the thinking behind this bizarre thing?

Oh and congrats on the others, I travel to Ohio a lot on business, especially Columbus and would love to be able to carry there.

 

[antsi]

No, no, no!

As we are often reminded on this forum, incremental strategies don't work.

If you are faced with the choice between an imperfect CCW law or no CCW law at all, ALWAYS opt for no CCW law at all. Allowing any kind of restrictions in a CCW law is an infringement of the Second Ammendment. Once you allow those restrictions, they'll NEVER go away. There NEVER has been an example of any state where an imperfect CCW law was improved by subsequent legislatures.

Above all, remember: the only effective political strategy is to DEMAND that EVERYTHING be made PERFECT, RIGHT NOW!

 

[TexasRifleman]

DEMAND that EVERYTHING be made PERFECT, RIGHT NOW!

Right, good point. And we all know how well that has worked in states that have tried it. Very good point

There NEVER has been an example of any state where an imperfect CCW law was improved by subsequent legislatures.

Nope. Never happened in Texas either. In fact, it never happened TWICE!

 

[enfield]

Once again I'm glad I don't live in Ohio.

 

[Henry Bowman]

antsi, I see the tongue in your cheek, but as you can see, we had to "give" something else just to "get" some of the poison pills removed.

I don't see how Taft's opinion is relevant at this point. I would think that Strickland would be glad to sign it to "prove" how pro-gun he is.

 

[Linda]

That all sounds wonderful in the perfect Utopia Antsi, but that's not where any of us live. There isn't a state in the country that is going to get everything they want initally with concealed carry laws. That's why we've worked SO hard on this one. Certainly, it's not everything we wanted, but we are getting car carry and preemption fixed. Those are huge for us who are living this every day.

And I assure you, I'd rather have had the imperfect concealed carry law that we've had for 3 years, than to not had it at all. Put yourself in my shoes of being female, middle aged, a real estate agent who has to meet strangers at strange, quite often vacant properties at any given time of the day. Have the hairs go up on the back of your neck just once, and you will understand my joy in knowing that my best friend Colt .45 is very near and dear to my hip.

Is it an infringement of my 2nd Amendment rights? Sure it is. That is why I've joined forces and spend countless hours a week, with my fellow like minded Ohioans to fight the good fight of defending our firearm rights. But at least we have concealed carry. Ask anyone from IL or Wisconson if they wouldn't accept a slightly less than perfect concealed carry law over what they don't have now.

 

[TexasRifleman]

That all sounds wonderful in the perfect Utopia Antsi, but that's not where any of us live.

Antsi is not being serious understand.

There is a group of folks on THR that actually DO believe that way and they are constantly surprised why they can make no headway in their state.

I won't name the state, they know who they are; they are the ones not carrying concealed

 

[Linda]

Antsi is not being serious understand.


Thank Goodness!!! Thanks for clarifying!! That's a relief.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Thank Goodness!!! Thanks for clarifying!! That's a relief.

Oh, you want some real entertainment go read the SERIOUS debates on that tactic. It's hilarious!

 

[arthurcw]

There is a group of folks on THR that actually DO believe that way and they are constantly surprised why they can make no headway in their state.

Not only on THR, not only in one state, not only on one issue. I am constantly amazed at the number of people who don’t understand the concept of politics as a kind of war. You make head way here and there. You get your butt kicked here and there. But as long as the balance of your movement is in the right direction, you are winning.

While you may make spectacular air raids on the capital (analogous to getting a group of "Pro Cause" CongressCritters elected), you still have to occupy it (get your laws passed), and that takes a long slogging advance one inch (law) at a time.

Congrats to Ohio! Keep on pushing!