Without fanfare, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed H.B. 234 into law Friday. While the gun law reform bill didn’t make all the changes that Second Amendment supporters desired, it made substantial improvements in the law, and was broadly supported in the legislature. That support was reflected by the large vote margins for passage of the bill; 24-6 in the Senate, 69-16 in the House. Among its provision, the bill . . .

  • Creates reciprocity to recognize concealed handgun permits from other states, much as drivers licenses are recognized.
  • Eliminates a provision in the law that equated semi-automatics firearms that could accept magazines with a capacity of more than 30 rounds as automatic weapons.
  • States that the Ohio CHL will meet the requirements of the national instant check system.  This should allow CHL holders to purchase firearms by presenting their CHL to firearms dealers.
  • Allows for training certification by any “national gun advocacy organization” instead of the National Rifle Association specifically.
  • Allows for partial training online, but requires two hours of in person range time for CHL permit training.
  • Extends Ohio CHL permit expiration to the date of expiration on the permit, instead of upon change of residency.
  • Provides that entry into parking lots with a CHL shall not be considered criminal trespass.
  • Allows people in the Military, Peace Corps, and Service to America six months grace to renew an Ohio concealed handgun license.
  • Creates as “Shall Sign” provision for chief law enforcement officers who process National Firearms Act (NFA) forms.
  • Allows people with legal gun mufflers to use them for hunting game.

These common sense reforms have been sought in Ohio for many years. Second amendment activists say that they will be back for more reforms next year.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Gun Watch

Recommended For You

72 Responses to Ohio Gov. Kasich Signs Gun Law Reform Bill Into Law (H.B. 234)

  1. Meh. Crumbs.

    We’ve only had licensing for a little under ten years now. If we’re going to kill mandatory licensing and shift to something like Arizona has, the time window is closing rapidly, IMHO.

    If Ohio were to get rid of the few special carve outs for CHL that exclude open carry only then I’d be happier about the new legislation. As it stands, we still cannot carry without a license in (or on in the case of a motorcycle) a motor vehicle. We cannot pick up our children from school without a CHL. Nor can we go in a tavern armed without a CHL.

    • I love it. My Indiana license will be valid in Ohio in 90 days.

      I’ll be working in Dayton after the new year, but will probably be done with the project before the bill goes into effect, unfortunately.

      • Yep. It is good for reciprocity, I’m glad that you will be able to conceal carry in the O-hi-o. 🙂

        As you probably know, parts of Dayton can be a little rough. You could open carry. I do. In any event, stay safe and carry on.

        • My dad works right next to the ballpark. He’s a very new gun owner but is looking to get his CHL, but didn’t have the time to do the 12 hours of classes. With these changes, he’ll be able to get one now.

      • Are you certain our Indiana permit to carry? I believe the ruling states something to the effect of Ohio being able to issue into agreements with states that have licensing requirements similar to theirs. I’m afraid that Ohio will take the fact that we have a lifetime license and no classroom requirements as an opportunity to not enter in to a reciprocity agreement with us. Just my .02 cents for concern.

      • I suppose my PA LTCF will be good in Ohio now, too, which is nice. I doubt PA will honor Ohio’s permits as long as our current AG remains in office, though.

    • I’m 100% pro 2A. I’m licensed to carry in Arizona and Washington. I’m not thrilled with constitutional carry. Here’s why, there are too many people with little or no firearms knowledge or training in carrying a firearm. They don’t know the difference from a striker fired, SA, DA/SA and even less as to what states they can and not carry in or what constitutes appropriate lethal force. Talk to any experienced firearms instructor and see what they think of training or allowing concealed weapons with little or no firearms experience. Consider what’s been written on this site over and over, about being vigilant and aware of your surroundings, about breathing during an encounter, tactical reload vs speed reload or combat reload, using cover, firing at multiple opponents and the list goes on and on.

      I’m all for national carry, where one permit is good in every state, but I’d like everyone who packs a weapon to have training, experience and knowledge appropriate for carrying that firearm.

      This might irk people, but if you can’t pass a class that consists of classroom and range time, I’d rather they not be carrying concealed as I think no experience folks handling firearms in an emergency situation is of little to no use to anyone.

      • Then you really aren’t in favor of the right to keep and bear arms. You would rather have a government privilege replace the actual right. Thankfully, it’s not up to you.

        People, this is a prime example of why I did not support licensing concealed carry in Ohio. It created a divide. It created a lobby against the right to bear arms. It creates a wedge that statists drive deep into our freedom.

      • Aaaaand that’s where your argument fails. Rights are rights until you prove you aren’t capable of being responsible enough to handle said rights and not a second before that. Until a crime is committed, the use of arms should not be deprived of any law abiding citizen. You’ve fallen into the same line of thinking Democrats have. “Gun are for me and not for thee, until you can meet the requirements I’ve set forward for you to pass.” Who are you to determine that? How about I deny your right to vote until I deem your choice of political office adequate? Or, you can’t practice religious freedom unless it’s from a list of approved religions I’ve chosen for you. Yeah, didn’t think so. With freedom comes risk. “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Don’t fall into the liberal trap of thinking you’re the smartest guy in the room.

        • Annnnnnnnd I didn’t say they can’t have them, I said I would rather them not carry them concealed without a class.
          I don’t make the laws, it’s my opinion.
          Don’t think you’re so smart as to dictate to my opinion next time.

        • Annnnnnnnd I didn’t say they can’t have them, I said I would rather them not carry them concealed without a class.

          What other natural, constitutional rights should require a “class” before exercising? Should people have to know the difference between a newspaper, a magazine (not a clip), and a blog before exercising the right of free speech? Should people have to know the doctrinal differences between the three, major monotheistic religions before exercising the freedom of religious expression? Should people have to know the differences between reasonable suspicion, probable cause, and reasonable doubt before availing themselves of their fourth-amendment protections? Should people be required to recite the Miranda warnings before availing themselves of their fifth-amendment protections?

          But in the end, I still can’t get past “I’m 100% pro second amendment, but I’m against constitutional carry.“. That just doesn’t make any sense, whatsoever. The second amendment says “shall not be infringed.” Constitutional carry means that the state statutorily does not infringe.

          Classes are an infringement. Qualifications are an infringement. Random litmus tests (such as knowing arbitrary terminology) are an infringement. Permits are an infringement.

          You may think you’re “100% pro 2A”, but you’re not. You’re a “butter”. You’re all for the second amendment, except for your chosen infringements.

        • So where in the 2a does it state that this right is only for law abiding citizens, my criminal history has no bearing but i will give it too you anyhow im a felon for ccw before a permit was available then trumped up bs assault charge after i refussed to be arrested for exercise of my 2a right now im legally not allowed to own a firearm you see the divide created here those willing to stand up and fight for a right not a privilege become the criminal . without criminals cops have nothing to do , when you hit nails with a hammer all day everything starts to look like a nail much the same for police officers everyone else is a criminal.

      • I’m not thrilled with constitutional carry.

        That’s unfortunate, because that is what the 2A is all about which you have said you are 100% pro 2A.

        They don’t know the difference from a striker fired, SA, DA/SA

        Nor do they need to. They really only need to know how “their” firearm operates. They don’t even need to know the terminology for how it operates.

        Consider what’s been written on this site over and over, about being vigilant and aware of your surroundings, about breathing during an encounter, tactical reload vs speed reload or combat reload, using cover, firing at multiple opponents and the list goes on and on.

        A persons “tactical” knowledge and/or training has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear arms.

        I’m all for national carry, where one permit is good in every state, but I’d like everyone who packs a weapon to have training, experience and knowledge appropriate for carrying that firearm./blockquote>

        Constitutional carry is much better, because a “permit” is not required to exercise a “right.” How is a right a right when you must be “permitted” to exercise it? It is those individuals “personal responsibility” to acquire their own proficiency through their own quest for training, knowledge, and practice. Obviously, if they perform a negligent discharge or harm someone accidentally they will be charged and punishing accordingly. It is their personal responsibility to pursue the adequate practice and safety. It is not our place to deny their rights because we believe they have not.

        This might irk people, but if you can’t pass a class that consists of classroom and range time, I’d rather they not be carrying concealed as I think no experience folks handling firearms in an emergency situation is of little to no use to anyone.

        It doesn’t matter if it irk’s people or not. The only thing that matters is you embrace rights over “public safety.” Because the public safety game can be played until there are no rights left. Furthermore, freedom entails risk, if we want to be a free society then we must accept there will be a few “undesirables” that will cause issues. This is the price that must be paid, and it’s worth it.

        I recommend you read “let’s talk limits” by Dick Metcalf:
        http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Lets-Talk-Limits-by-Dick-Metcalf-of-Guns-Ammo-December-2013.pdf

        Where dick tries to explain that everyone should undergo mandatory training in order to exercise their right and manipulates the 2nd amendment text “well regulated” to further his narrative.

        Keep in mind Dick wrote his own career resignation with these statements. They only ones who would embrace his work now are dailykos, huffpo, or the new york times – and they have.

      • I’m not thrilled with constitutional carry.

        That’s unfortunate, because that is what the 2A is all about which you have said you are 100% pro 2A.

        They don’t know the difference from a striker fired, SA, DA/SA

        Nor do they need to. They really only need to know how “their” firearm operates. They don’t even need to know the terminology for how it operates.

        Consider what’s been written on this site over and over, about being vigilant and aware of your surroundings, about breathing during an encounter, tactical reload vs speed reload or combat reload, using cover, firing at multiple opponents and the list goes on and on.

        A persons “tactical” knowledge has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear arms.

        I’m all for national carry, where one permit is good in every state, but I’d like everyone who packs a weapon to have training, experience and knowledge appropriate for carrying that firearm.

        Constitutional carry is much better, because a “permit” is not required to exercise a “right.” How is a right a right when you must be “permitted” to exercise it? It is those individual’s “personal responsibility” to acquire their own proficiency through their own quest for training, knowledge, and practice. Obviously, if they perform a negligent discharge or harm someone accidentally they will be charged and punishing accordingly. It is their personal responsibility to pursue the adequate practice and safety. It is not our place to deny their rights because we believe they have not.

        This might irk people, but if you can’t pass a class that consists of classroom and range time, I’d rather they not be carrying concealed as I think no experience folks handling firearms in an emergency situation is of little to no use to anyone.

        It doesn’t matter if it irk’s people or not. The only thing that matters is you embrace rights over “public safety.” Because the public safety game can be played until there are no rights left. Furthermore, freedom entails risk, if we want to be a free society then we must accept there will be a few “undesirables” that will cause issues. This is the price that must be paid, and it’s worth it.

        I recommend you read “let’s talk limits” by Dick Metcalf, where dick tries to explain that everyone should undergo mandatory training in order to exercise their right and manipulates the 2nd amendment text “well regulated” to further his narrative.

        Keep in mind Dick wrote his own career resignation with these statements.

      • We all have differing opinions Mark, and we are each entitled to them. Just because we disagree with you and (some of us) verbally slapped you around, doesn’t mean we don’t like you. Some of us here (me included) can be fairly criticizing, but we are not always right. If you feel something is correct and many of us disagree – make a defensible argument.

        Also, every member of TTAG is awesome and opinions differ. I would like to go shooting with every member of TTAG, but that would interfere with my anonymous status, and none of the TTAGer’s here apparently live near me. Lastly, if someone rains ad hominems on you – just ignore them. They apparently couldn’t construct a logical counter-argument. Most of us here are pretty thick-skinned (That’s how we ran off Paul McCain and acquired “open carry” Dean Weingarten – J/K).

      • I’m certainly glad you’re NOT making the laws! “100% pro 2 A”……..I think not. You are the very definition of a “butter.”

      • If you’re so worried about gun knowledge and safety, advocate for it to be taught in schools. Knowledge would do more to reduce crime/accidents than requiring law-abiding adults to be issued a permit to exercise their rights. We advocate drivers education to reduce accidents, we advocate sex education to reduce pregnancies…what is so freaking bad about teaching teenagers how to handle a firearm?

      • I am also all for people taking training courses, and have no objection to tax money being spent for public announcements that you should get training. BUT! (…training, but…) No law can require that, by order of 2A. Constitutional carry is, well, the ONLY constitutional carry.

      • Mark,

        Your concerns about untrained people causing mayhem are unfounded. Remember, the state does not require a license to carry concealed in Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, Wyoming, and Arkansas. If untrained people were the bumbling morons that you envision, surely we would see trouble among the millions of people in those states. And yet we do not.

        Furthermore, very few if any police receive the intensive training that you apparently want as a requirement to carry concealed. Holding everyday people to an even higher standard is not appropriate.

      • “Talk to any experienced firearms instructor and see what they think of training or allowing concealed weapons with little or no firearms experience.”
        And talk to any cobbler and see what they think about running around barefoot.

    • I’ll defer to you on this one, as an Ohioan, yourself. Sounds like some needed, but long overdue, reforms. However, signing this without fanfare, the week of Christmas, secure after having won re-election, strikes me not as a firearms freedom champion.

      It smacks of someone quietly and belatedly burnishing his conservative street cred in advance of running the gauntlet of upcoming presidential primaries. Sorry, Kasich, no brownie points.

      • You hit the nail on the head my friend. Various controversial items (like the right to leave a firearm locked in a car at a school) were dropped prior to ultimate passage, and I do not believe it was a coincidence. Kasich allowed just enough into the bill to curry favor with the NRA, but omitted the items that would attract hardcore assailants from the left. I am glad the bill was signed, and Kasich deserves some credit, but those who are preparing to anoint him for 2A sainthood should proceed with caution.

  2. Wonderful !!!!! We should not forget friends like gov. kasich in the future. the Shall sigh on NFA is HUGE! and I hope it will be coppied in other states.

  3. I know a lot of folks worked very hard to get this bill pushed through, and I am very thankful for there time. It is filled with some great things. My favorite is fixing the definition of automatic weapon.

    Next I would like to see the shall inform be removed. I would also like to see the loophole where a city can rent out a public park to a privet party and then that party can post the public park a GFSZ.

    • I would also like to see the loophole where a city can rent out a public park to a privet party and then that party can post the public park a GFSZ.

      I’m not sure how much of a loophole that really is. Here in SW Ohio local government backed down on that nonsense. One example was the WEBN fireworks this year. They started off by citing it as a private event but realized that they didn’t have a legal leg to stand on. In the northern part of the state, they just blatantly ignore the law so that no matter what we will probably have to sue them to get them to act in accordance with any firearms law.

    • The most important thing that Ohio now needs to change is self-defense not being an affirmative defense. In 49 states, self-defense is affirmative, and once the burden of production is met by the accused, the state bears the burden to disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. In one state, the accused bears the burden to prove self-defense with a preponderance of the evidence. That one state is Ohio.

      • I don’t think it should be the absolute top priority but agree that it should be one of the highest (perhaps #2). It is something that needs fixing right away. One of my friends is working with legislators on it. We were talking about that specific topic a couple of weeks ago.

  4. There are some solid reforms here, congrats all around. More needs to be done, and I’m confident that Buckeye Firearms Assiciation and the NRA will press for more in 2015.

    As for Kasich: I am glad he signed the bill into law, however I believe it likely that he had a few friends in the legislature strip out more controversial provisions to make the bill something he could sign without attracting too much heat during a 2016 run for POTUS. I’m not saying that was right or wrong, just something to bear in mind.

  5. I hope Ohio’s ideas are contagious. Criminals, if they are smart, will move on to NYC, LA, and San Francisco where the taxpayers have been disarmed for their convenience.

    • There’s the attitude. Relentless, positive steps all across America. We’ve come a long way. Just imagine how pissed Shannon Watts and Bloomberg and Feinstein and Prez Barry, et al are today. Another of a thousand cuts they’ve had to endure. And that’s a good thing.
      The ONLY thing removing us from the fates of South Africa, or Britain, or Australia, or any western country presently being overrun by the violence brought by third world immigration is our precious 2nd Amendment. And that’s why our gov. hates it so much. Glad I just renewed my NRA membership.

  6. Creates as “Shall Sign” provision for chief law enforcement officers who process National Firearms Act (NFA) forms.

    If the ATF eliminates NFA trusts, this would be very nice to have.

  7. Remember, the majority of this bill was NOT about the right to keep and bear arms. It was mainly about the licensed privilege to conceal a firearm. It isn’t really much about the actual right. When the activity requires a government license or other government permission, it ceases to be the exercise of an actual right. Rights =/= privileges. So this isn’t really isn’t about the furtherance of the Second Amendment or the right to bear arms in the Constitution of Ohio. It is about modification of government sanctioned privileges.

    However, I am pleased that it has passed and was signed into law.

  8. Old question: Who do I support for POTUS in 2016?

    NEW answer: Governor John Kasich of Ohio!

    (Old answer: Ben Carson)

      • I’m a one-issue voter. If you’re pretty good on everything else and pro-actively PRO-GUN, you’re my man. If you are perfect on everything else, seemingly, but squishy on guns or even lean toward gun control, you mean nothing to me.

      • No more republicrats/demopublicans. No difference in them. The mighty lord Reagan and Gerald Ford sold us out by actively campaigning for the passage of the ’94 “assault weapons” ban. Both Bushes said they would sign a permanent “assault weapons” ban bill if it was laid on their desk. More than one third of the present republican contingent in the House, as well as the Senate have voted FOR some type of seriously restrictive gun control in their careers in government. The only party out there that is totally and unequivocally pro gun, rain or shine, all day, every day, is the Libertarian party. The republicans will slit the throat of gun owners just as fast as the democrats if they find it politically expedient. It’s time to support a party that actually believes the whole Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment.

        • HERE HERE!!
          False Dichotomy (N): The American two party system.

          “In regards to the two party system, I think it’s time for a second party” -Ron Paul

      • Give Carson some time to ‘adjust his attitude’ on the 2A.

        Just about every other position he has is good by me.

        He lacks experience, I could be happy with him as VP.

    • Kasich has been good for gun rights, however I believe Cruz, Perry, or Paul all would be better for us in the White House. And I say that as a lifelong Ohioan. The 2A is of secondary importance to Kasich.

  9. I want to see the day that we can pack. Another words pack should mean “when I get home I have to pack for my flight, or something like that. Right now if you say I want to pack it means gun”, anyway it’s a better thing out there for us and it will get closer in time. Everyone watch your six, don’t let someone sneek up on ya!

  10. Reciprocity — as opposed to recognition — is kind of a trap. Recognition means that if the other state’s requirements meet or exceeds Ohio’s, the other state’s licenses would be recognized in OH, no agreement necessary. That would be good.

    Reciprocity requires two AGs from two states to agree, and for them to agree, their respective requirements probably need to match. That’s bad.

    For example, let’s say that OH and State X want to consider a reciprocal arrangement. X’s standards exceed OH’s standards, so OH could recognize X’s licenses if the OH AG had that power. Unfortunately, he doesn’t.

    If State X has a reciprocity law similar to OH’s, OH would want to sign up, but X would not be able to because X’s standards exceed OH’s. And if X can’t agree, then OH can’t either because a joint agreement is required under OH law. So, both states’ license holders are screwed.

    Which I guess is the whole point.

    • Currently, Ohio doesn’t recognize my Indiana LTCH, because Indiana does not have “substantially similar” training/certification requirements.

      Once HB 234, now law, takes effect, Ohio will henceforth recognize my Indiana LTCH.

      • Sorry Mark lloyd. You are not 100% 2nd amendment. You know, the part that says “shall not be infringed”?

        Your a statist. You believe the 2nd amendment is a privilige, not a right.

        The only difference between you and
        Bloomberg as to level gun control is degree, not kind.

        So get in with all of the other gun control fanatics. You will be in good(bad) company.

  11. OK, it sounds as if under the new subsection B, Ohio will now recognize the permit of any state that recognizes its permit.

    Colorado law says essentially the same thing.

    We’re now in a situation where each state is waiting for the other to recognize its permit.

  12. Actually there was fanfare. Picture in the Plain Dealer today Governor with Buckeye Firearms lawyer, his children, Ohio NRA rep Linda Walker, and several others. Shoddy reporting Dean.

  13. Constitutional Carry or GO HOME! This is just like FL with CCW and open carry. AWESOME! We finally got conceal carry! Except we lost our open carry and only mean of carrying a gun without financial stress. All so we could have ‘Shall Issue’ status. Last time I check, the constitution gives us ‘Shall Issue’. States always tradeoff when it comes to gun rights. My goal in life is to get rid of that one little part at the end of the sentence in our state’s Constitution, “, except that the manner of bearing arms may be regulated by law.”

  14. Good luck with the next mass shooting our country will witness, Ohio… You know what they say about buckeyes…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *