To amend sections 311.42, 2923.12, 2923.122, and 2923.126 of the Revised Code to modify the prohibition against carrying a concealed handgun onto institutions of higher education, day-care facilities, aircraft, certain government facilities, public areas of airport terminals and police stations, and school safety zones and to allow a sheriff to use concealed handgun license fee revenue to purchase ammunition and firearms.
In the 2016 election, Republicans gained a seat in the Buckeye State Senate (from 23 to 24) while Democrats lost a seat (from 10 to 9). In the House, the Republicans gained two seats, one of them a vacancy. The balance of power will shift from 64 – 34 to 66 – 33 for the 2017 132nd General Assembly.
Second Amendment supporters won big on election day. The State Senators of Ohio may be taking notice. An Ohio Senate committee will finally hear HB48 today, nearly a year after House passage. From wlwt.com:
A concealed-carry bill dormant since last year will be heard again Tuesday.
It would reduce penalties for certain concealed-carry violations and expand the list of premises where permit holders can carry their weapons to include day care centers and public areas of airports and police stations. It would also allow concealed guns within government buildings under specific circumstances.
Chairman William Coley II has announced that the Senate Government Oversight and Reform Committee will be hearing proponent testimony on HB 48 (Eliminate many ‘no-guns’ victim zones) on Tuesday, November 29 at 8:30 a.m. in the North Hearing Room., and proponent/opponent/interested party testimony on Wednesday, November 30 at 8:45 a.m. in the Finance Hearing Room. The chairman has indicated that amendments may be offered at the Wednesday hearing.
As passed by the House, HB 48 seeks to restore Ohioans’ right to carry in day-care facilities (unless they post “no-guns”), private airplanes, school safety zones, and in non-secure areas of police stations and airports.
The bill also contains “opt-in” language which would to allow authorities governing college campuses and certain government buildings the ability to allow concealed carry.
©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included. Gun Watch
I thought this story was going to say that today’s spree killer who attacked Ohio State University’s campus motivated the Ohio state Senate to move on the bill which would permit concealed carry on college campuses.
Not only has today’s spree killer attack apparently provided no incentive to the Ohio state Senate, the bill realistically will not lead to permitted concealed carry on universities since it only allows universities to “opt in” … which we all know means no concealed carry at universities.
Yeah, it’s a step obviously. The state will have gone from the government mandating that no guns will be allowed on campus to forcing the colleges them to forbid it… I think. This legal crap is so unnecessarily complicated. You practically need to be a lawer to carry a gun in many states. It’s the main reason why I ever leave my gun at home. If I carry in the wrong place, my right to carry and possibly my right to own q gun goes bye bye forever. So I leave it at home most of the time.
Good for you, comrade! Now would you be so kind as to tell us where you live and what times no one is home?
Motion record UHD cameras, pings phone when activated, coupled with cloud storage and a very very fast police response time and enough heavy doors and steel walls to slow intruders down.
Not to mention neighbors that are about as redneck as they come…
pfffft. I ain’t afraid of you people.
But! It makes it more obvious who is to blame.
From what I understand Abdul the Somali azzhole ran college students over before getting stabby. And the left wonders how Trump won the electoral cillege. Yeah “gun free” zones suck…
“The balance of power will shift from 64 – 34 to 66 – 33 for the 2017 132nd General Assembly…”
If they didn’t do it with 64 (to 34!) why would they do it with just 2 more?
“to use concealed handgun license fee revenue”
So… when is the monetary taxation on the 2A going to be repealed?
The Ohio Legislature is a complex beast. Its legislative cycle is 2 years which ends 12-31-2016 meaning that any bill that fails to pass both houses is dead and will have to be re-introduced in the next legislative session and goes to committee just like it was never introduced in the last session. Essentially, they start over every 2 years.
After the election, the legislature is only in session for something like a week or two before it adjourns for the holiday. To get a vote during the last session is pretty rare even though a bill has wide support. They basically wait for the majority and minority leaders in each house to bump bellies and work it out even if the the majority can carry it by themselves.
You probably don’t want to see how sausage is made either…
More laws, more laws, more laws. Repeal all the weapons law, allow people to carry anywhere, anytime without a government permit unless they are a felon, mental unfit and a convicted domestic violence offender.
“unless they are a felon, mental unfit and a convicted domestic violence offender”
You can’t have it both ways. In order to identify these (with the inevitable distortions and malicious intent of those who decide such things), the whole background check and licensing insanity is required. Not that it is effective in keeping guns away from those bad folks, of course, but it is one of the excuses for tyranny that keeps on doing what those “prior restraint” restrictions are actually intended to do… keep guns out of as many hands as they can manage.
It is not possible to keep guns, or any other weapon out of the hands of those who would use them to harm others. It is possible to defend oneself from them, and arrange mutual defense plans for groups and communities as well. Innocent until proven guilty… no to prior restraint.
Spot. On.
You do not need background checks and licensing to identify people who are felons, mentally incompetent or convicted domestic violence offenders.
Those lists are already there. They can be accessed (with the possible exception of some of the mentally ill) by law enforcement already. When people are on probation, they can be searched and checked to make sure they are in compliance. That leaves 99% of the population alone.
You really believe that? So, prior restraint of millions, with government “lists” and police powers to stop and search/intimidate anyone they don’t like… this is freedom?
The key is that no amount of police powers to harass and search people on lists will ever stop the bad people from obtaining and using weapons to harm others. It isn’t even possible in maximum security prisons!
So, why is it you want to do this? Just curious.
Where did I talk about prior restraint? You brought that up, not me.
You are correct that police powers to stop bad people from obtaining and using weapons to hurt others is not possible 100% of the time. But you can focus efforts to be much more efficient. Requiring millions to undergo background checks to stop a couple of hundred criminals from buying a gun retail is an incredibly inefficient use of resources.
Keeping a careful eye on a hundred thousand career criminals on probation is a much, much more efficient use of resources. Why are they roaming the streets in the first place, if they are so dangerous? It is the way the system works now.
Prior restraint is depriving any individual of their liberty/rights because of something they “might” do, and often simply because of their circumstances – such as use of unapproved vegetation. Or having in their possession something like a spent piece of brass, or – horrors – an actual round of ammunition in places like NJ.
Trying to predict the actions of all these thousands, millions of people is a fool’s game. The most logical and effective measure for prevention of actual crimes… you know, those with an actual victim – is the death or serious bodily injury of the aggressor, the criminal, at the hands of the intended victim or their guardians… or sometimes bystanders. Attempting to disarm the aggressors ahead of time is both impossible and damaging to all the rest of us, one way or another.
Where I live, we have had one murder in the last ten years. Both victim and murderer had recently come from Texas. The man was not a “prohibited person,” and the woman was unarmed and helpless. No amount of prior restraint would have made any difference.
Interesting. I wasn’t aware folks who are under probation have signs on them stating such. Otherwise I’m not sure how anyone would know they are on probation. Or do police and FFL’s have special powers to see the prohibited ones?
First, police tend to know career criminals in their area. Second, the community knows who they are, and who the dangerous ones are. Those are the ones who are watched carefully in David Kennedy’s programs. They do not need a sign. They are already known.
Sorry, but I’m going to say it…This Police powers, 2nd amendment issues, etc…It’s about “Job Entitlements and Police Unions.” Of course the people in cushy government public services jobs with special job related “privileges” aren’t going to support armed citizens. Never have, and never will…Armed US citizens would show their irrelevance…The Police Unions wouldn’t allow anything that would jeopardize their cash cow…It’s all about the money, job entitlements, and Unions…