HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby DontTreadOnMe » Fri Dec 07, 2018 11:43 am

Chuck wrote:Thank you!


I was trying to find the penalties related to ORC 2923.126 (A)

Is there a penalty associated with this section of code?

No that just documents the duty. Any time charges are filed they're filed as a violation of 2923.12 Carrying Concealed Weapons or 2923.16 Improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle

The violation against Improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle is the same. It's 2923.16(E)1 or 2 and the penalty under (I) likewise makes it a first degree misdemeanor with license suspension, and has the same impossible to prove "actual knowledge" language which would (theoretically but not in reality) drop the penalty to a MM.

The reason I'm so dismissive of the "actual knowledge" reduction is that it's the charging officer writing the citation as an M1. I've seen plenty of news stories of CHL holders arrested for failure to notify. Not ticketed, arrested. Arrested <> MM. When I've been able to find the dockets, they haven't been listed as MM. If the charging officer is saying he or she didn't have actual knowledge of the license status then, well, that's pretty much that.
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 1663
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby Chuck » Fri Dec 07, 2018 12:07 pm

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
Chuck wrote:Thank you!


I was trying to find the penalties related to ORC 2923.126 (A)

Is there a penalty associated with this section of code?

No that just documents the duty. Any time charges are filed they're filed as a violation of 2923.12 Carrying Concealed Weapons or 2923.16 Improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle


That's where I was hanging up
Thank you


The violation against Improperly handling firearms in a motor vehicle is the same. It's 2923.16(E)1 or 2 and the penalty under (I) likewise makes it a first degree misdemeanor with license suspension, and has the same impossible to prove "actual knowledge" language which would (theoretically but not in reality) drop the penalty to a MM.

The reason I'm so dismissive of the "actual knowledge" reduction is that it's the charging officer writing the citation as an M1. I've seen plenty of news stories of CHL holders arrested for failure to notify. Not ticketed, arrested. Arrested <> MM. When I've been able to find the dockets, they haven't been listed as MM. If the charging officer is saying he or she didn't have actual knowledge of the license status then, well, that's pretty much that.


During discussions I was led to believe that only the MM for illegal transport while unlicensed was going to be pulled. That was the only one anyone objected to.
Sounds like ALL of them got pulled, which is very significant.
I will complain. It won't matter, but I will complain

This is the trouble with last minute sausage; you're never sure what's going in and what's coming out
Ain't activism fun?

"Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company. " - George Washington

"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something.
And because I can not do everything, I will not refuse to do the something I can do.
What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of GOD, I will do."
- Edward Everett Hale (descendant of Nathan Hale)
User avatar
Chuck
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
 
Posts: 4465
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby DontTreadOnMe » Fri Dec 07, 2018 12:26 pm

Chuck wrote:During discussions I was led to believe that only the MM for illegal transport while unlicensed was going to be pulled. That was the only one anyone objected to.
Sounds like ALL of them got pulled, which is very significant.
I will complain. It won't matter, but I will complain

This is the trouble with last minute sausage; you're never sure what's going in and what's coming out

It's probably because decreased penalty for notification was in 142 along with the change to method of notification. If they killed 142 and didn't incorporate any of it into 228 then that's what happened.
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 1663
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby qmti » Fri Dec 07, 2018 12:36 pm

bignflnut wrote:
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Facing threats of a veto from outgoing Gov. John Kasich, Ohio's state Senate voted 19-10 to pass a gun rights law that omitted the most controversial portion of the legislation passed by the House: The so-called "stand your ground" provision.

If the House approves the new version of House Bill 228 and Kasich signs it, gun owners in Ohio will still have the duty to retreat from a threatening situation before they reach for a deadly weapon -- something the original law would have eliminated.

However, they would no longer shoulder the burden of proving they were justified if they did claim to have shot another person in self-defense. Instead, as is already law in all 49 other states, prosecutors would be required to prove a crime had been committed.

The final iteration of the law was one that left both gun rights advocates and proponents of greater restrictions exactly "half-happy," Moms Demand Action member Richele O'Connor said Thursday.


I'm not attesting to the truth of the reporting, just posting to demonstrate how it is being reported.


I saw the "Moms" interview on TV last night. They said they were happy that some parts of the bill were taken out.
qmti
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 506
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 2:18 pm

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby DontTreadOnMe » Fri Dec 07, 2018 12:46 pm

Chuck wrote:I will complain. It won't matter, but I will complain

I'm sure you're right it won't matter, but maybe for next time here's a (non-comprehensive) list of just some of the crimes the State of Ohio punishes less severely than failing to promptly notify an officer that you have a CHL and are legally carrying a firearm:

Vehicular Manslaughter 2903.06(D)
Neglect against a resident or patient of a care facility 2903.34(E)
Sexual imposition 2907.06(C)
Public indecency 2907.09(C)(2-4)
Soliciting 2907.24(C)(1)
Prostitution 2907.25 (C)(1)
Domestic Violence (by threat of force) 2919.25(D)(3)
Failure to secure dangerous ordnance 2923.19(B)
Underage purchase of handgun 2923.211(C)
Dealing in drug paraphernalia 2925.14(F)(2,4)
Illegal dispensing of drug samples 2925.36(C)(3)(a)
Abuse of a corpse 2927.01(C)

When I go on about the penalty level being, IMO, outrageous, this is what I'm talking about.
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 1663
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby qmti » Fri Dec 07, 2018 12:54 pm

BFA just posted the HB228 summary on their site. They say it's a good bill. I guess I'm still trying to absorb the details to see if it really does something pertaining to self defense.
qmti
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 506
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 2:18 pm

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby djthomas » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:03 pm

Chuck wrote:This is the trouble with last minute sausage; you're never sure what's going in and what's coming out

Or this bute:
Sec. 9.69. (A) As used in this section, "law enforcement officer" means any of the following who is employed, commissioned, disposed, appointed, or elected in a capacity specified in division (A)(1), (2), or (3) of this section for this state, a political subdivision of this state, or an agency, department, or instrumentality of this state or a political subdivision of this state:
(1) Any law enforcement officer, as defined in section 2901.01 of the Revised Code;
(2) Any peace officer, as defined in section 2935.01 of the Revised Code;
(3) Any person who is employed in this state, who is authorized to carry firearms, and who is subject to and in compliance with the requirements of section 109.801 of the Revised Code.

Pretty straight forward, I'm good with that, but....
(B) For purposes of the Revised Code, both of the following apply regarding a law enforcement officer who, by virtue of the officer's employment, commissioning, disposition, appointment, or election as that law enforcement officer, has a responsibility to enforce all or certain laws:
(1) The officer holds public office on a continuing basis and has a continuing duty to enforce those laws.
(2) The officer is always on duty, regardless of whether the officer is, or is not, officially within work hours or officially on the clock.

What in the Hades does division (B) mean or do? Is it a statement of policy (LEOs are always on duty) or a restriction on the definition of LEO as used elsewhere in the Revised Code? What about a when the definition used in this section (i.e. from (A)) is different from the definition used elsewhere in the Revised Code.
Never ask if you can carry at a non-posted place, but always ask why you cannot at one that is!
Just because they offer call ahead seating doesn't mean you call ahead for carry permission.
User avatar
djthomas
 
Posts: 5843
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Location: Medina County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby zeko » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:03 pm

Concerning a possible veto override, the Senate vote on HB228 was 19 - 10. This means we need one more Yes vote to override a veto.

There were three senators who did not vote -- Frank LaRose (R) and two Democrats. If we can persuade Senator LaRose to vote Yes, we would have the veto override. Do any of you live in his district (mainly Wayne County)?

Zeko
zeko
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Morrow County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby DontTreadOnMe » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:04 pm

qmti wrote:BFA just posted the HB228 summary on their site. They say it's a good bill. I guess I'm still trying to absorb the details to see if it really does something pertaining to self defense.

Shifting the burden of disproving self defense onto the prosecution is good. Very good. The shockwave screwup is very bad and I going that can get fixed as quickly as possible.
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 1663
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby schmieg » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:04 pm

qmti wrote:BFA just posted the HB228 summary on their site. They say it's a good bill. I guess I'm still trying to absorb the details to see if it really does something pertaining to self defense.

It's not a bad bill. The elimination of the affirmative defense nonsense is the best part. As I said earlier, if I had to choose between eliminating the affirmative defense and eliminating duty to retreat, I would choose the former. It would have been nice to have both, but politics is the art of the possible. The best version of this bill was gutted, but we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

In a couple of weeks, we start all over again.
-- Mike

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
User avatar
schmieg
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 5169
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Madeira, Ohio

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby Mustang380gal » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:12 pm

Yes, I live in Wayne County. As far as I know, he is firearm-friendly. I will call when it gets to that point, but I am not worried about him.
RIFLEWOMAN, wife of a RIFLEMAN, mom of 9, NRA life member, OFCC Patron member!
User avatar
Mustang380gal
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 6709
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:18 am
Location: Amish Country, Wayne County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby DontTreadOnMe » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:18 pm

The problem now is the shockwave snafu has the potential to really screw this up (re: veto override). I'm not going to say anymore now because I don't know what possibilities there are but I will say if it's left to go into law as it is the repercussions will be substantial. Hopefully there's some method of addressing pre- or very quickly post- .
User avatar
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 1663
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby rickt » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:47 pm

Ironically, the provision that makes straw purchases illegal under state law is one of Kasich's goals outlined on his "Making Ohioans safer from gun violence" web page.

https://www.governor.ohio.gov/Priorities-and-Initiatives/Making-Ohioans-Safer-from-Gun-Violence
User avatar
rickt
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 2955
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:35 am
Location: Cuyahoga County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby rickt » Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:50 pm

Chuck wrote:So far the list of items removed from HB 228 by the Senate:

All language concerning duty to retreat

Minor misdemeanors for victimless crimes that can only be committed by CHL holders

SBRs


What else?
I want to write to somebody


Allowing guns in subsidized housing disappeared.
User avatar
rickt
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 2955
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:35 am
Location: Cuyahoga County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Postby djthomas » Fri Dec 07, 2018 2:16 pm

DontTreadOnMe wrote:The problem now is the shockwave snafu has the potential to really screw this up (re: veto override). I'm not going to say anymore now because I don't know what possibilities there are but I will say if it's left to go into law as it is the repercussions will be substantial. Hopefully there's some method of addressing pre- or very quickly post- .

All the more reason Kasich might just sign it and really stick it to the 2A crowd. SYG is gone, cops get more privileges (private property rights are sacrosanct, except when they're not), straw purchases are illegal at the state level, AND an untold number of previously law-abiding gun loving Ohioans will be guilty of a fifth degree felony in just 90 short days.
Never ask if you can carry at a non-posted place, but always ask why you cannot at one that is!
Just because they offer call ahead seating doesn't mean you call ahead for carry permission.
User avatar
djthomas
 
Posts: 5843
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Location: Medina County

PreviousNext

Return to Tweed Ring's Ohio Politics and Legislation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 2 guests