Ohio Governor DeWine Signs Bill Eliminating ‘Duty to Retreat’

Governor Mike DeWine. Via Twitter.

In a surprise to many, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine actually signed a bill eliminating the duty to retreat for Ohio residents. Previously, the right to armed self defense had been limited to a person’s residence or vehicle. Under the new “stand your ground law,” Ohioans have the right to defend themselves against threats of death or serious bodily harm anywhere they have a legal right to be.

The governor had threatened to veto the stand your ground legislation last year and instead wanted a bevy of new gun control measures sent to his desk.

Of course, anti-gun Democrats sought to pressure the Republican governor to reject the measure. In the end though, DeWine chose to protect whatever shreds of political viability he had with the people of Ohio in keeping previous pledges made during the last election to support such a measure.

Newsmax has the story.

An individual’s duty to retreat before using force has been eliminated in Ohio under a gun rights bill signed by Republican Gov. Mike DeWine on Monday despite the governor’s vocal concerns that GOP lawmakers were ignoring his own legislation proposed following the 2019 mass shooting in Dayton.

The measure expands the so-called “stand your ground” right from an individual’s house and car to any place, “if that person is in a place in which the person lawfully has a right to be.”

As recently as last month DeWine hinted he might veto the bill, saying lawmakers should focus on what he sent them instead. But on Monday, he signed the bill in “the spirit of cooperation” with the General Assembly.

“I look forward to working with members of the legislature in the future to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and to protect the rights of citizens who follow the law,” DeWine said.

That, of course, was not what big city Democrat gun-grabbers wanted.


Both residents of Ohio and visitors will benefit from this common sense affirmation of a person’s right to self-defense while outside the home. This means Ohioans who choose to violently prey upon their fellow citizens while committing crimes will find their lives at greater risk. Not the law-abiding everyday citizens of the Buckeye State.

 

comments

  1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

    About damn time.

    Thugs need to understand violent assault on the law-abiding may result in lawful self-defense to stop the attack…

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      “Thugs need to understand violent assault on the law-abiding may result in lawful self-defense to stop the attack… “

      We just saw an excellent example of that concept at the United States capital in Washington DC.

      1. avatar Ing says:

        False equivalence noted and dismissed.

        The people in that crowd had an absolute right to be there — and we, the people, not the creatures inside it, own that building. They forget that they occupy it only at our pleasure.

      2. avatar drunkEODguy says:

        yeah, attacking average joe blows and burning down their business is acceptable to you, but doing it to the actual power players isn’t. I don’t approve of any of the riots all this past year or on the 6th. That’s because I have integrity though, try it out miner. You may feel like less of a human stain.

  2. avatar Montana Actual says:

    Stand Your Ground puts lives at risk? Pretty sure it saves lives and stops crimes. The entire purpose is very clear.

    1. avatar Rusty - Always Carry - Chains says:

      Of course it puts lives at risk, Thug Lives Matter!

      (do I really need a /S on this?)

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Montana Actual,

      As Rusty Chains so aptly hinted, repealing Duty to Retreat most certainly does put lives at risk: the lives of criminal attackers.

      It really should not surprise anyone at this point the lengths that politicians are willing to go to in order to protect petty and violent criminals.

      1. avatar Texican says:

        Otherwise known as democrat constituents!

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Exactly! It is most definitely not in Democrats’ best interest to imprison their voting base.

  3. avatar Ronald (sure shot) says:

    Very smart man, he still has some common sense.

  4. avatar Debbie W. says:

    Well ohio senator kenny yuko you can exclude yourself from the bill. All you have to do is swear to shut up and comply with some pervert while he slaps you around and has anal sex with you. Problem solved.

    1. avatar Gnur Syzlmnski says:

      That would be his duty to retreat and in his retreat to expose his backside for a plunging assault

  5. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    An individual’s duty to retreat before using force has been eliminated in Ohio under a gun rights bill …

    Is there anything in the new law specifically about firearms? If the law is only about repealing Duty to Retreat then this is not a “gun rights bill” because there are a lot of options to deploy force in self-defense which do not include a firearm.

    1. avatar Tired of the bs says:

      Good question. I need to read the whole thing

    2. avatar hawkeye says:

      “Is there anything in the new law specifically about firearms?”

      According to this version of the bill, the answer is no in the context of duty to retreat.

      https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legislation/legislation-summary?id=GA133-SB-175

      It speaks to the use of force in self defense, and doesn’t specify certain weapons. Which means it doesn’t discriminate for/against any specific lawful weapons. It strikes the language that required the person to be in their residence or personal/family vehicle, and replaces it with the phrase “…if that person is in a place in which the person lawfully has a right to be.” There is additional language that reinforces the changes.

      It also includes a paragraph that provides immunity from civil liability to nonprofits if a CHL holder happens to plug a thug while on their premises.

      That’s my interpretation of the bill. I recommend you all read it for yourselves and draw your own conclusions–it isn’t very long.

  6. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    They is why you should stay involved. Because they only care about staying in office. The gun vote pressured this Republican to do something he didn’t want to do. And the bill got signed.

    One step forward. Incrementally. But Let Freedom Ring.

    1. avatar Coolbreeze says:

      Chris T, you are exactly right. It was the thing for him to do in that given moment to maintain/further his political power. Politicians have no moral code of ethics by any common definition. They have but one driving force in thier life: attain and increase power over others. They do it by passing laws and by subversion of laws. Some use physical violence (see Brown Shirts).

      1. avatar Coolbreeze says:

        DeWine is a graduate of Miami University (Ohio) and Ohio Northern University. So why is his official masked up photo featuring an Ohio State University mask? It speaks to the emotions of the overwhelming majority of Ohio voters. That simple. Political expediency. What ever it takes. Fool em. Lead the trick ponies. Every once in a while you have to slip them a carrot if you want them to do the trick (vote) for you.
        We have a corrupt form of government now. Sadly.

        1. avatar Miner49er says:

          You conservatives take this tribalism thing really just too far, it’s all about us and them with you people.

          Isn’t governor DeWine the governor for the entire state of Ohio, including OSU?

          And didn’t he just expand rights for gun owners in Ohio?

          Conservative tribalism is anti-American, and a great threat to our freedom.

        2. avatar Ing says:

          What do you mean, “you people”?

          Racist.

  7. avatar Mark N. says:

    Does anyone know when this bill takes effect? Immediately or at some specified date in the future? (As an example, California laws go into effect either in September or January 1, depending, unless it is emergency legislation).

    1. avatar Hooda Thunkett says:

      90 days hence; April 4th or thereabouts.

  8. avatar Ralph says:

    DeWhine (sic) is not a RINO, but he is a putz, so I’m surprised that he finally stood up for his constituents. It’s about time.

    1. avatar Brian L Taylor says:

      DeWine is in trouble with Constitutionalists over his Covid-19 decrees. He cannot afford to go pro crime at the moment. His anti gun votes lost him his US Senate seat. I hope he can be primaried before a term limited second term where he could go wild RINO.

  9. avatar Hooda Thunkett says:

    It should be noted that this bill takes effect 90 days AFTER the signing, or April 4th. Prior to that, if you find yourself in an imminent situation, compromising position, you still have that duty to imminently depart, if possible. And proving it wasn’t possible is dang nigh impossible…

    1. avatar Texican says:

      Probably wouldn’t be prosecuted due to the new law going into effect. I’d take my chances. Glad we already have it here. Hopefully, we can get Constitutional Carry enacted. Finally.

  10. avatar possum says:

    “Duty to retreat”, sounds like I’m wearing a uniform or some shit.

  11. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    I want to caution people that, even with legislation removing a duty to retreat, or establishing a “castle doctrine” in your own home, when you have zealous and cause-committed DA’s and AG’s, you can have a very tough slog ahead of you in court.

    For an example of this, let’s talk about a case in the Wyoming Supreme Court last spring:

    https://documents.courts.state.wy.us/Opinions/State%20v.%20John%20S-19-0046.pdf

    I strongly recommend that people read through that case carefully, as it picks apart the various arguments and issues that zealot DA’s and AG’s will bring to bear. NB that the party defending himself used an AR-15 in this case, and that he used nine rounds to stop an invasion of his home. Then also NB2 the array of elected officials who were pressing the case against the man defending his home, and NB that this is an “appeal of an appeal,” ie, the state AG and local DA were trying to get a prior appeal overturning a murder conviction thrown out.

    NB3 that the legislature had changed the self-defense statutes only as recently as early in 2018 when the incident occurred.

    By all rights of the legislation and the legislated intent, this case should never have been brought against Mr. John, the man defending his home.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Thanks for posting the case, DG. It is a must-read.

      1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

        Ralph, I’ve had that link in my “pile of stuff to mention,” awaiting the issue of SYG laws to come ’round again on TTAG since it was handed down. I thought of you when I put up the link, because as I read it, I was thinking of the points you would make if you were involved in the case.

        I found it to be an education insofar as “let’s make a checklist of things to think about in a self-defense situation…”

    2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      NB?

      NB2?

      NB3?

      Huh?

      1. avatar Ing says:

        NB = Nota Bene. Latin for “mark well,” used in academic and technical disciplines to call attention to an important point. Generally it’s used sparingly and not numbered; DG got carried away. 🙂

  12. avatar M. Murcek says:

    Winky Blinky thinks he is biding his time until the GOPe is back in the driver’s seat and gun rights are there for the taking.

    1. avatar Tired of the bs says:

      You got that right

  13. avatar Redman says:

    It appears as someone is off their meds…I live in Ohio and Dewine is a rino a putz and a closet Trump hater. He can sign 1000 stand your ground laws and I will not vote for him again. He acts like he is a king and tramples on the Constitution. He is a bad as Kasich.

    1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      Both DeWine and Kasich are what I like to call “Vichy Republicans.” They’re like the Vichy French in WWII – they’ll surrender and appease the invaders, just so they can keep their lifestyle and eat their stinky cheese.

      1. avatar Tired of the bs says:

        totally agree

      2. avatar Redman says:

        Great analogy! Spot on!

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email