POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

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

Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators

Vote for up to three items. Votes can be changed until 1-4-15

Poll ended at Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:11 pm

1- Repeal of RC 2923.126(B)(9) -- ridiculous to be unable to carry in buildings we paid for. Should be language that prohibits posting of any public building or property.
52
20%
2- Repeal of RC 2923.126(B)(5) -- campus carry (unless private college decides to post per RC 2923.126(B)(3)(A))
10
4%
3- Repeal of RC 2923.126(B)(6) -- church carry (unless church decides to post per RC 2923.126(B)(3)(A))
13
5%
4- Repeal of RC 2923.126(B)(7) -- daycare carry (unless private day care decides to post per RC 2923.126(B)(3)(A))
1
0%
5- Either eliminate RC 2923.122 Schools, or redefine "school zone" to only mean inside actual buildings instead of property.
47
18%
6- Put teeth in 9.68 to fine both the body politic and its elected officials (personally) for statutes that violate preemption.
21
8%
Clarify 9.68 that preemption is reserved only to statutes enacted by the OGA, and state agencies do not have the right to impose additional restrictions by regulation.
9
3%
7- Repeal of RC 2923.16, allowing all Ohioans to carry in their vehicle for self defense. Allow loaded handguns and long guns.
14
5%
8- Repeal ORC 2923.12(B)(1), ORC 2923.12(F)(3), ORC 2923.16(E)(1) and (2), ORC 2923.16(I)... requiring notification and ORC 2923.126(A), relevant language.
55
21%
9- Constitutional Carry
7
3%
10- "Swatting" law
1
0%
11- Employee parking lot storage
33
13%
 
Total votes : 263

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby radiotron » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:45 pm

HB 420, (parking lot carry) would have the greatest positive effect on how frequently I carry concealed. I drive about 300 miles / week, and around 250 of it is for my work commute. Since I'm prohibited from having my firearm in the car when I arrive at work, I'm without it more than 80% of the time. :(

-radiotron
radiotron
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:13 pm
Location: Ottawa, OH 45875

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby Sevens » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:50 pm

pleasantguywhopacks wrote:I don't have any kids and never will so school fix doesn't really affect me at all. Go after them all.

It promotes more legal good guys with guns in their cars at school. That is a win win win for the entire country, if even only needed once.
I like to swap brass... and I'm looking for .32 H&R Mag, .327 Fed Mag, .380 Auto and 10mm. If you have some and would like to swap for something else, send me a note!
User avatar
Sevens
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 7401
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 8:30 am
Location: Far East Side of CBus

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby Chuck » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:51 pm

I added employee parking lots storage to the poll.
Go change your votes if it's important to you,,,,

**ON EDIT**
Oh no!
Adding an item to the poll took away everybody's vote!
I won't do that again,
Sorry, please vote again, everyone,,,,
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: 4437
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby JediSkipdogg » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:53 pm

MyWifeSaidYes wrote:Yes, but BUSINESSES are ALREADY REGULATED !! What's one more law?

I usually support the 'property rights' side, but when I look at just how many laws and regulations I have to adhere to just to start and run a business, I really don't have a compelling argument against a pro-gun parking lot law. There are a TON of laws that are enacted to "protect the public". If our legislators (next session, of course) feel that allowing employees, customers and visitors to secure their guns in their cars is better for our safety than being forced to leave them at home, so be it.

But it should include EVERYWHERE that even resembles a business (including schools and government property).

But don't call it a "commuter safety" law because the anti's will just link "commuter' with "road rage" in their arguments.


What's one more infringement of our rights? Let's just align with federal law. After all, it's just one more law. :wink:

The thing I worry about is obviously the new method is large bills that encompass a lot. Is it worth putting the battle up when 50% of the firearm community can't even agree that it's good? It could cost a large bill it's chance of passing unless it happens to get stripped out, which I think it would.

I think John Benner said it best when I was talking to him at TDI earlier this year about this. He said when you start mixing private property rights with constitutional rights, you start playing with fire. You lose some support when you start telling businesses how they can conduct their business.

pleasantguywhopacks wrote:Must not be a lot of church goers in the forums. Fine then go after enumerated CPZ as a whole. I don't have any kids and never will so school fix doesn't really affect me at all. Go after them all.


I wanted to pick that but it wasn't on my priority list. I think it should be included in a list of fixing statutory CPZs though. 1-4 should all be in the same bill as a whole.
Carrying Concealed Handguns - Signage Answers

Ohio Concealed Carry Classes in S/W Ohio
http://www.ProShootersTraining.com

I am not a lawyer. My answers are based on research, knowledge, and are generally backed up with facts, the Ohio Revised Code, or the United States Code.
User avatar
JediSkipdogg
 
Posts: 10133
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:03 pm
Location: Batavia

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby JediSkipdogg » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:54 pm

Chuck wrote:I added employee parking lots storage to the poll.
Go change your votes if it's important to you,,,,

**ON EDIT**
Oh no!
Adding an item to the poll took away everybody's vote!
I won't do that again,
Sorry, please vote again, everyone,,,,


I was just going to post that. You found out the secret (bad secret) of polls.
Carrying Concealed Handguns - Signage Answers

Ohio Concealed Carry Classes in S/W Ohio
http://www.ProShootersTraining.com

I am not a lawyer. My answers are based on research, knowledge, and are generally backed up with facts, the Ohio Revised Code, or the United States Code.
User avatar
JediSkipdogg
 
Posts: 10133
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:03 pm
Location: Batavia

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby MyWifeSaidYes » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:56 pm

They dropped the part of Sub. HB 234 that would have allowed a military ID to qualify as a CHL in Ohio, mainly because not everyone with a military has gone through firearms training (yet).

But how about our current problem with 18-20 year old military members?

R.C. 2923.211 "Underage purchase of firearm or handgun" allows police officers, armed service members and veterans, aged 18 to 20, to PURCHASE a handgun IF the individual has received police or military firearms training.

HOWEVER

R.C. 2923.21"Improperly furnishing firearms to minor" still fails to allow the sale or furnishing of a handgun to the armed service members and veterans listed in 2923.211.

WHAT THIS MEANS IS that, while properly trained 18 to 20 year old military members are allowed to BUY and POSSESS a handgun...

...no one is allowed to SELL or FURNISH them one.


I have to believe that the 127th GA made their intent clear by passing HB 450, which made many changes for our armed service members and veterans.

This should be considered a "technical fix" and sail through, right?
MyWifeSaidYes
User avatar
MyWifeSaidYes
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 5406
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:59 pm
Location: Central Ohio

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby MyWifeSaidYes » Sun Dec 14, 2014 9:59 pm

JediSkipdogg wrote:
MyWifeSaidYes wrote:Yes, but BUSINESSES are ALREADY REGULATED !! What's one more PRO-GUN law?


What's one more infringement of our rights? Let's just align with federal law. After all, it's just one more law. :wink:


I clarified my sentiment. :P
MyWifeSaidYes
User avatar
MyWifeSaidYes
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 5406
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:59 pm
Location: Central Ohio

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby pleasantguywhopacks » Sun Dec 14, 2014 10:04 pm

I think you have a better chance of getting rid of church CPZ than schools. I think you have a good chance at giving 9.68 teeth and getting loaded long guns in cars for licensees. The rest I don't think you have a chance at getting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOxXpNBdrVE
When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!
Life Member NRA
User avatar
pleasantguywhopacks
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 16746
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 2:20 pm
Location: Whitehouse, OH

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby JustaShooter » Sun Dec 14, 2014 10:04 pm

Chuck wrote:Oh no!
Adding an item to the poll took away everybody's vote!
I won't do that again,
Sorry, please vote again, everyone,,,,

Shame you didn't add an option for removal of the duty to retreat and affirmative defense for self-defense claims while you were in there.
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
User avatar
JustaShooter
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 4570
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby MyWifeSaidYes » Sun Dec 14, 2014 10:07 pm

I'd love to vote for constitutional carry, but after seeing what did NOT make it into HB 234, there is zero chance (IMHO) of that getting done in the next session.

Anything related to the MILITARY has an ABOVE AVERAGE chance of being passed, as December 7, 2016 will be the 75th anniversary of Pearl Harbor.

It will also be about the time the legislators are coming back to work.

Start looking for Pearl Harbor survivors now to speak in front of any committees in 2016.
MyWifeSaidYes
User avatar
MyWifeSaidYes
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 5406
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:59 pm
Location: Central Ohio

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby Klingon00 » Mon Dec 15, 2014 10:14 am

I'm suffering from buffet indecision syndrome, I want it all but realize my eyes are bigger than my stomach.

While I'd love to get constitutional carry, I realize moving too quickly can get the frog to jump. Little steps turning up the heat slowly is what's getting the job done and I see little reason for change.

I'd really like to see repeal of requirements to inform and repeal of any restrictions on carrying on public property, including schools and college campuses.

If that's too heavy a lift, putting teeth in 9.68 would also be a welcome addition.
User avatar
Klingon00
 
Posts: 3742
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 11:47 am
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby fyrfytr310 » Mon Dec 15, 2014 1:05 pm

MyWifeSaidYes wrote:I'd love to vote for constitutional carry, but after seeing what did NOT make it into HB 234, there is zero chance (IMHO) of that getting done in the next session.


I agree. It is on the very distant horizon IMO but there are a lot of valleys and forests that must be traversed before we get there.

MyWifeSaidYes wrote:Start looking for Pearl Harbor survivors now to speak in front of any committees in 2016.


The pickings are getting very sadly slim there. No?
-Mike

NRA Life Member

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People."
Tench Coxe
User avatar
fyrfytr310
 
Posts: 1045
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 6:38 pm
Location: Hamilton, OH

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby WayneB » Mon Dec 15, 2014 1:35 pm

Klingon00 wrote:I'm suffering from buffet indecision syndrome, I want it all but realize my eyes are bigger than my stomach.

While I'd love to get constitutional carry, I realize moving too quickly can get the frog to jump. Little steps turning up the heat slowly is what's getting the job done and I see little reason for change.

I'd really like to see repeal of requirements to inform and repeal of any restrictions on carrying on public property, including schools and college campuses.

If that's too heavy a lift, putting teeth in 9.68 would also be a welcome addition.

Pretty much where I'm at. Get rid of informing -- although personally, not a huge problem at the moment. I've successfully notified with no issue several times.

Biggest irony to me is that we have to disarm in public buildings. Something owned by US, that WE are not allowed to exercise OUR rights in. I don't use them much, but it just makes no sense to me that the 2A specifically restricts the .gov from making these very laws in the first place. This would include schools for me, although it's listed separately. The fact that kids are there is only an emotional add-on. "Buildings have to be off limits 'cuz .gov people work there.". So? "Schools have to be off limits 'cuz kids are there.". So?

Didn't go for church as CPZ (for now) since there is a possible solution for the individual. They can petition the church to have permission. Even if this were enacted, there would be some group mailing all the churches that they had to post signs to keep all the wild gun people out. Then we'd have to spend five more years contacting all of them to get their signs down (much like restaurant carry). Doesn't seem to be enough bang for the buck.
WayneB
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 883
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:52 am
Location: Norton, Ohio (Summit County)

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby JediSkipdogg » Mon Dec 15, 2014 1:48 pm

WayneB wrote:Pretty much where I'm at. Get rid of informing -- although personally, not a huge problem at the moment. I've successfully notified with no issue several times.


I've never had the issue either, but out of all the arrests with CHL holders at my small department, this is the biggest one I see. Heck, I even saw one (well, read it) where the officer cited for failure to notify because he returned to his vehicle and had sat down when the subject honked his horn to remember to notify. So since he did what the law said to do, but didn't do it "promptly" he was arrested for it. That's just one example. I'm sure we could find over 100 cases if we put some record requests together.
Carrying Concealed Handguns - Signage Answers

Ohio Concealed Carry Classes in S/W Ohio
http://www.ProShootersTraining.com

I am not a lawyer. My answers are based on research, knowledge, and are generally backed up with facts, the Ohio Revised Code, or the United States Code.
User avatar
JediSkipdogg
 
Posts: 10133
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:03 pm
Location: Batavia

Re: POLL: 2015-2016 Legislative session What does OFCC want?

Postby mrbone » Mon Dec 15, 2014 7:31 pm

soberbiker wrote:We've had the gun rights vs property rights argument too many times here and could never reach a consensus. In Ohio if they can't fire you for your gun they can fire you for your haircut.

How about this to settle it. If the firearm remains in my car then the firearm remains in *my property*. It never physically touches anything that belongs to my employer nor (assuming an open air lot) ever enters any edifice owned by my employer. Ergo property rights are not violated unless the employer has a ban on vehicles touching its parking lot property. :) It's like an airplane that flies over the land without touching it nor entering anything owned by my employer, my firearm also remains above the actual property without touching nor entering anything owned by my employer.
mrbone
 
Posts: 2215
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 2:50 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Tweed Ring's Ohio Politics and Legislation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests