The bill, pushed by the National Rifle Association
Erm....No. It was Ohio's grass-roots efforts and politicians who realize the "dangers" of passing such legislations are largely in the eyes of the press and bliss-ninnies.
but prosecutors have argued that it more likely will aid criminals.
I guess they mean a person that
murders someone in their home can claim self-defense and get away with it.
You have to prove your innocence beyond a reasonable doubt by proving the "Big Three". Fear of great bodily harm or death. Attacker has ability to inflict such harm. You have no possibility to avoid using force (i.e. you have duty to retreat if possible.)
I haven't heard of any instance where someone has been nailed for defending themselves in their home, but the law has always been very vague here in Ohio on a lot of things involving guns. I'm not a proponent for legislation to cover everything, but I'm glad these are being spelled out.
The fear of running afoul of the law unintentionaly is a worry. Some of the other big wins of the bill as I read it:
-Can legally carry in stores that have a Class D6-D8 liquor license for Sunday and general sales (non-consumption on premesis). Before the law restricted all carry in Class D licenses, but I don't think it was ever enforced on the basis of being silly and confusing.
-Running accidently afoul of the restrictions with a carry permit now results in a Misdemeanor charge, temprorary suspension of license, and fine on the first time. Second time is a felony. Previous law was instant revocation and felony charge.
-Provides legal requirements for return of guns . The gist I got was to prevent police from keeping your gun after you use it to defend yourself and are exonerated of wrong-doing.
-Permits carry in certain gov't funded buildings like park restrooms etc. I'm not sure of the specific list, but it seemed the idea was to remove the "gov't funded" label from certain places licensee's were likely to go to no longer restrict their carry there.
Big loss: Carry in restaurants. This was removed from the original bill by the house. I'm not sure what they're trying to prevent since it's illegal to carry while under the influence. If I want to carry into a restaurant and not drink drink alcohol, why should I be restricted from doing so?
Regardless, this bill is a lot of the things we've wanted (things the antis hate) and only a few things we need to continue working on. Big Win, any way you look at it.
