Pending Ohio Gun Legislation

[rickt]

HB 454 passed the House yesterday by a vote of 81-2.

[gfrlaser]

What, in laymans terms, does that passage mean to us now?

[JustaShooter]

HB 454 passed the House yesterday by a vote of 81-2.

Sure wish it removed the "while immediately in the process of..." language entirely and replaced it with "for any legal purpose" or somesuch. But it is a step in the right direction I suppose. Now it just needs to make it through the senate and get signed...

[djthomas]

Sure wish it removed the "while immediately in the process of..." language entirely and replaced it with "for any legal purpose" or somesuch. But it is a step in the right direction I suppose. Now it just needs to make it through the senate and get signed...

Short of getting rolled into another bill I don't see this getting through the Senate this year. I could be wrong but it would still have to go to committee. Perhaps the sudden movement was an attempt to give the Senate the vehicle discussed earlier?

[JustaShooter]

Sure wish it removed the "while immediately in the process of..." language entirely and replaced it with "for any legal purpose" or somesuch. But it is a step in the right direction I suppose. Now it just needs to make it through the senate and get signed...

Short of getting rolled into another bill I don't see this getting through the Senate this year. I could be wrong but it would still have to go to committee. Perhaps the sudden movement was an attempt to give the Senate the vehicle discussed earlier?

Huh. Just saw this at the bottom of the bill on http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bill ... 130_HB_454" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; - does this mean it is ready for the governor's signature?

Section 3. Section 2923.122 of the Revised Code is presented in this act as a composite of the section as amended by both Am. Sub. H.B. 495 and Am. Sub. S.B. 337 of the 129th General Assembly. The General Assembly, applying the principle stated in division (B) of section 1.52 of the Revised Code that amendments are to be harmonized if reasonably capable of simultaneous operation, finds that the composite is the resulting version of the section in effect prior to the effective date of the section as presented in this act.

[Stryker74]

Sure wish it removed the "while immediately in the process of..." language entirely and replaced it with "for any legal purpose" or somesuch. But it is a step in the right direction I suppose. Now it just needs to make it through the senate and get signed...

Short of getting rolled into another bill I don't see this getting through the Senate this year. I could be wrong but it would still have to go to committee. Perhaps the sudden movement was an attempt to give the Senate the vehicle discussed earlier?

Huh. Just saw this at the bottom of the bill on http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bill ... 130_HB_454" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; - does this mean it is ready for the governor's signature?

Section 3. Section 2923.122 of the Revised Code is presented in this act as a composite of the section as amended by both Am. Sub. H.B. 495 and Am. Sub. S.B. 337 of the 129th General Assembly. The General Assembly, applying the principle stated in division (B) of section 1.52 of the Revised Code that amendments are to be harmonized if reasonably capable of simultaneous operation, finds that the composite is the resulting version of the section in effect prior to the effective date of the section as presented in this act.

That indicates that there are other contrary bills in play, but this one is the newest and would come out on top if all were passed. So, if the others ones get passed and signed into law along with this one - this one wins and becomes the actual law with regard to the piece in the bill.

So far, this one has only passed in the House - it still has to be assigned to a Senate committee. That process, along with a Senate vote, and possible House concurrence to any changes the Senate might put in - makes this a bit of a long shot before the legislature is done on 12/17 or 12/18 (at least in my mind - strange things do happen at the Statehouse though).

[rimfireOH]

Yikes!

I understand why Cleveland MetroParks Ranger Department would need night vision glasses (search and rescue?) and even perhaps a few mine detecting sets and maybe even the body armor (for when you detect a mine). But why do they need 37 5.56mm rifles? Really, thirty-seven?

[curmudgeon3]

Yikes!

I understand why Cleveland MetroParks Ranger Department would need night vision glasses (search and rescue?) and even perhaps a few mine detecting sets and maybe even the body armor (for when you detect a mine). But why do they need 37 5.56mm rifles? Really, thirty-seven?

Deer control ? Individual smaller communities don't want to do it anymore. Too costly for their budgets.

[Morne]

All,

Weird things going on in the rushed lame duck session of the General Assembly:

HB234 and/or SB338 might well get the NICS compliance language from HB203 inserted into it. While this SEEMS like a good idea, heck I even used to like this concept, it turns out to have a bunch of tangled unintended consequences. There's a possibility that the language inserted into HB234/SB338 will be better than the mess that was in HB203 (no disrespect to that bill's sponsor, Terry Johnson, who when he realized what he had wrought said, "Wow, that's gotta go then!"). We don't (yet) have the amendment wording for this, but we do know that amendments are possible on these bills come Tuesday.

Which brings me to my next point, SHOW UP AT THE HEARING TUESDAY 12/9/14!!!
http://www.ohiosenate.gov/committee/civil-justice

I will be there and will testify. The more folks we can get to show up (preferably in OFCC regalia) the better. If you feel the urge to testify please write up a copy of what you intend to say and bring copies (25) so that the staff can distribute them to the committee members.

It's crunch time!

[Werz]

HB234 and/or SB338 might well get the NICS compliance language from HB203 inserted into it. While this SEEMS like a good idea, heck I even used to like this concept, it turns out to have a bunch of tangled unintended consequences. There's a possibility that the language inserted into HB234/SB338 will be better than the mess that was in HB203 (no disrespect to that bill's sponsor, Terry Johnson, who when he realized what he had wrought said, "Wow, that's gotta go then!"). We don't (yet) have the amendment wording for this, but we do know that amendments are possible on these bills come Tuesday.

Here's what concerns me. Someone will attempt to slide the NICS compliance language into SB338, along with amendment to R.C. 2923.13 that's already there, and say, "See? We fixed it!" No, you didn't. I have already discussed that here. My response to any such claim is, "Don't pee down my leg and tell me that it's raining."

[Chuck]

This is a very valid concern in my opinion,,,,

[curmudgeon3]

ONE THING for sure, we've got to object to anything that brings any influence by Pres. Obama's regime into the mix of Ohio state's already long list of RKBA "regulations", like His adjustable myriad list of reasons to disqualify LACs from owning or carrying defensive firearms in the interests of promoting Socialism.

[MyWifeSaidYes]

Tomorrow morning, folks!

See you all at 9:45 a.m. at the Statehouse, right!

[Stryker74]

Tomorrow morning, folks!

See you all at 9:45 a.m. at the Statehouse, right!

You bringing doughnuts?

[Pops Fun]

Should be there..