Dangerous Ordnance Rules

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

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
DTakas
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:08 am

Dangerous Ordnance Rules

Post by DTakas »

So this whole H.B. 228 with the shockwave mistake thing has me a bit confused regarding some other dangerous ordnance stuff.

In reading up on the dangerous ordnance section it seems that smaller non shockwave short barreled shotguns, silencers, etc would still be a dangerous ordnance even when this H.B. 228 stuff gets fixed. I even found a website (nationalguntrust.com) that states that for Ohio “These items can be privately owned with a dangerous ordnance license in addition to compliance with the NFA.”

But it was my understanding that if you had a legally registered NFA item the NFA status kind of trumped the dangerous ordnance status. Like dangerous ordnance only applied to illegal weapons or something to that effect.

So I did some more research on it, and the closest thing to that effect I can find is in section 2923.17 (c) On who unlawful possession of a dangerous ordnance does not apply to. Section 5. “Owners of dangerous ordnance registered in the national firearms registration and transfer record pursuant to the act of October 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1229, 26 U.S.C. 5841, and any amendments or additions thereto or reenactments thereof, and regulations issued thereunder;”

is this section exempting owners of items legally registered under the NFA, or do NFA items still need a dangerous ordnance license too?
steves 50de
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 3515
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 5:26 pm
Location: n.e. ohio
Contact:

Re: Dangerous Ordnance Rules

Post by steves 50de »

You could SBS with NFA it has a 14 barrel.
Black Rifles Matter
JimE
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Ashland,OH

Re: Dangerous Ordnance Rules

Post by JimE »

So far as I have seen, if it registered properly under the NFA, no need to have an Ohio permit for dangerous ordinance.
I got my first stamp this year, and the Sheriff never contacted me about any other permits....and he gets a copy of the Form 4 application.
User avatar
Bruenor
Posts: 7306
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:03 pm
Location: Geneva, OH

Re: Dangerous Ordnance Rules

Post by Bruenor »

The Ohio registration probably comes into play mainly for non NFA items, when you are dealing with explosives and the like.

If you do farming, mining, demolition work, etc. and use explosives that would probably be registered with the state.
https://www.com.ohio.gov/documents/fire ... Permit.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
2923.18 License or temporary permit to possess or use dangerous ordnance.
(A) Upon application to the sheriff of the county or safety director or police chief of the municipality where the applicant resides or has his principal place of business, and upon payment of the fee specified in division (B) of this section, a license or temporary permit shall be issued to qualified applicants to acquire, possess, carry, or use dangerous ordnance, for the following purposes:

(1) Contractors, wreckers, quarrymen, mine operators, and other persons regularly employing explosives in the course of a legitimate business, with respect to explosives and explosive devices acquired, possessed, carried, or used in the course of such business;

(2) Farmers, with respect to explosives and explosive devices acquired, possessed, carried, or used for agricultural purposes on lands farmed by them;

(3) Scientists, engineers, and instructors, with respect to dangerous ordnance acquired, possessed, carried, or used in the course of bona fide research or instruction;

(4) Financial institution and armored car company guards, with respect to automatic firearms lawfully acquired, possessed, carried, or used by any such person while acting within the scope of his duties;

(5) In the discretion of the issuing authority, any responsible person, with respect to dangerous ordnance lawfully acquired, possessed, carried, or used for a legitimate research, scientific, educational, industrial, or other proper purpose.
:more:
Μολὼν λαβέ

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

- Thomas Paine

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

- Thomas Jefferson
MrMagoo
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 1465
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:54 pm
Location: Delaware County

Re: Dangerous Ordnance Rules

Post by MrMagoo »

Paragraph 7 was added to ORC 2923.11 in Sub HB 228. On the surface it appears to ban a lot of things. paragraph (L)(2) in that section excepts any pistol, rifle or shotgun designed or suitable for sporting purposes so I think we're ok here. I'd like to see an opinion on that from our legal minds.

The concern i have is suppressors that are banned under the National Firearms Act. In 2015 Ohio passed ORC 1533.04 wich allows suppressors for hunting. My non legal mind works this way: While suppressors may be illegal by the Feds, they are legal in Ohio under state law in certain circumstances and it would have to be a Federal law enforcement officer to arrest someone who had a legal suppressor under Ohio law.

Legal eagles chime in here and let me know if I'm off base in my thinking.

Gary
"The quality of a person's life is in direct proportion to their commitment to excellence, regardless of their chosen field of endeavor." Vince Lombardi
xpd54
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:43 am
Location: Dayton Area

Re: Dangerous Ordnance Rules

Post by xpd54 »

MrMagoo wrote: The concern i have is suppressors that are banned under the National Firearms Act. In 2015 Ohio passed ORC 1533.04 wich allows suppressors for hunting. My non legal mind works this way: While suppressors may be illegal by the Feds, they are legal in Ohio under state law in certain circumstances and it would have to be a Federal law enforcement officer to arrest someone who had a legal suppressor under Ohio law.

Legal eagles chime in here and let me know if I'm off base in my thinking.

Gary
This is important-
.|..provided that the person is authorized to possess the suppressor under state and federal laws and has registered the suppressor in accordance with the "National Firearms Act," 68A Stat. 725 (1934), 26 U.S.C. 5841, et seq., as amended.
If you’re hunting with a suppressor you’d better have your tax stamp with you to prove it is legally owned. State law predicates that you must be in compliance with federal law to use a suppressor for hunting.
".....in the end we must still slosh our way through the factbound morass of reasonableness."
- Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in Scott v. Harris

The views expressed in this post are my own. They have not been reviewed or approved by my employer.

My Blog
JimE
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Ashland,OH

Re: Dangerous Ordnance Rules

Post by JimE »

xpd54 wrote: If you’re hunting with a suppressor you’d better have your tax stamp with you to prove it is legally owned. State law predicates that you must be in compliance with federal law to use a suppressor for hunting.
I keep a photo of the Form 4 on my phone, and a photocopy in my gun case while hunting or target shooting with the can.
Liberty
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Akron

Re: Dangerous Ordnance Rules

Post by Liberty »

MrMagoo wrote:Paragraph 7 was added to ORC 2923.11 in Sub HB 228. On the surface it appears to ban a lot of things. paragraph (L)(2) in that section excepts any pistol, rifle or shotgun designed or suitable for sporting purposes so I think we're ok here. I'd like to see an opinion on that from our legal minds.

The concern i have is suppressors that are banned under the National Firearms Act. In 2015 Ohio passed ORC 1533.04 wich allows suppressors for hunting. My non legal mind works this way: While suppressors may be illegal by the Feds, they are legal in Ohio under state law in certain circumstances and it would have to be a Federal law enforcement officer to arrest someone who had a legal suppressor under Ohio law.

Legal eagles chime in here and let me know if I'm off base in my thinking.

Gary
We are absolutely not ok unless the legislature moves subsection 7 from subdivision k to subdivision L. Ohio law does not define sporting purpose. ATF's sporting purposes definition can be found here: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearms-g ... war-import" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, which states, in part, the following:
ATF has determined that certain features designed for military application are indicative of non-sporting rifles and shotguns. Features which are not recognized as sporting include, but are not limited to, folding or telescoping stocks, pistol grips that protrude conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon, a bayonet or bayonet mount, a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor, a grenade launcher and night sights. These features as well as other information concerning a particular firearm may result in ATF classifying a rifle or shotgun as non-sporting. Additional information regarding this subject is available in the Report and Recommendation of the ATF Working Group on the Importability of Certain Semiautomatic Rifles or The Department of Treasury Study on the Suitability of Modified Semiautomatic Assault Rifles.
Many courts have followed this definition and have defined AK and AR style firearms as weapons with no sporting purpose while sending otherwise law abiding citizens to prison. Particularly in the big cities of Ohio, anyone possessing AK and AR style firearms after Am Sub HB 228 takes effect will do so at great peril (i.e., confiscation of all non-sporting firearms, arrest, prosecution, imprisonment, loss of job, money spent on lawyers, loss of CHL, loss of right to own any firearm) unless the legislature fixes the language quickly.
mrbone
Posts: 2223
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 2:50 pm

Re: Dangerous Ordnance Rules

Post by mrbone »

MrMagoo wrote:My non legal mind works this way: While suppressors may be illegal by the Feds, they are legal in Ohio under state law in certain circumstances and it would have to be a Federal law enforcement officer to arrest someone who had a legal suppressor under Ohio law.
And also the feds bribe local law enforcement into enforcing federal laws with promises of funds and other goodies. So yes, a local cop might arrest you for violating the NFA. That's the whole debate with sanctuary cities. Many cities had enforced federal immigration laws (i.e. - arrest someone for federal immigration charges until the feds can pick him up and finish the process). As liberal cities are banning their cops from doing that, Trump has been trying to take away their funding.

I get annoyed at the conservatives who want to punish sanctuary cities for this. All it does is set a precedent for President Bloomberg in 2020 to punish cities whose local sheriffs don't enforce federal gun confiscation.
Post Reply