HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

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

Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby JediSkipdogg » Sat Dec 10, 2016 9:33 pm

FormerNavy wrote:
JediSkipdogg wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:- Removes the statutory prohibition against carry into day-care facilities. Privately-owned day cares can still post no-guns signage, just like any other business.


One of my biggest issues is the change of this one. Yes, they removed the statutory prohibition, however, they made it if they post the parking lot it is now a felony. Prior to this, I could gladly go into any daycare parking lot and be safe as long as I didn't take the firearm in the building. Unfortunately it says "posted land or premise" which to me depending on the wording one places on their front door, could include the entire land, at which point it is now an F4 violation for the firearm being loaded in the vehicle. HUGE step backwards on that one.


I'm wondering how this is reconciled with parking lots only being a civil problem. Does one take precedent over the other?


I would say since this is AFTER the other section this one now takes precedence for at least daycare places.
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: 10123
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:03 pm
Location: Batavia

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby djthomas » Sat Dec 10, 2016 10:10 pm

JediSkipdogg wrote:I would say since this is AFTER the other section this one now takes precedence for at least daycare places.

That may not be completely true. The existing 2323.126 was repealed and replaced by the new one which incorporated the changes. So arguably both provisions were enacted at the same time. The ORC says that the conflicting provisions are supposed to be harmonized so that both have effect but we'll never have a definitive ruling on that until someone gets arrested and takes it to the supreme court.

The other wrinkle is that the ORC still requires day cares to post so I could see a creative prosecutor saying it's not a matter of a private employer establishing a rule, it's a matter of them following the law.

Yuck.
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: 5814
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Location: Medina County

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby docachna » Sun Dec 11, 2016 11:34 am

JustaShooter wrote:Here's my summary:...............

- Prohibits employers from adopting or enforcing policies that ban firearms in employees' personal vehicles.


Is there a remedy available for employees whose employers continue to prohibit storage of firearms in the employee's locked motor vehicle in the company-owned parking lot ? Or is this just another toothless old warthog, all flash and no flavor ? :?:
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE
docachna
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 9:26 am
Location: Mount Juliet TN

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby JustaShooter » Sun Dec 11, 2016 1:35 pm

docachna wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:Here's my summary:...............

- Prohibits employers from adopting or enforcing policies that ban firearms in employees' personal vehicles.


Is there a remedy available for employees whose employers continue to prohibit storage of firearms in the employee's locked motor vehicle in the company-owned parking lot ? Or is this just another toothless old warthog, all flash and no flavor ? :?:

No penalty or remedy that I can see.
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: 4507
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby Brian D. » Sun Dec 11, 2016 5:13 pm

docachna wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:Here's my summary:...............

- Prohibits employers from adopting or enforcing policies that ban firearms in employees' personal vehicles.


Is there a remedy available for employees whose employers continue to prohibit storage of firearms in the employee's locked motor vehicle in the company-owned parking lot ? Or is this just another toothless old warthog, all flash and no flavor ? :?:


IF it were possible for the employee to anonymously submit his/her concerns about this to the employer's legal department, letting them know a copy has also been sent along to the Ohio Attorney General's office..eh, chances aren't that good any success would be achieved. Akin to deep sea fishing for 500 lb. sailfish with 10 lb. test line because you didn't have anything else.
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!

********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
Brian D.
 
Posts: 14683
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby gilly32 » Mon Dec 12, 2016 8:59 am

JustaShooter wrote:- Grants political subdivisions the authority to allow concealed carry in their government buildings.




Earlier versions of the bill granted the ability to carry into libraries. Was that provision removed and would it now fall under this?
"The right to keep and bear arms is rooted in both self-defense and insurance against government’s propensity toward tyranny. The right pre-existed the Constitution. Thus, the Second Amendment is not its source. The right to keep and bear arms is natural and inalienable; the Second Amendment protects it, and Congress has no legitimate power to restrict it." - Senator John Cornyn (R., Tex.), as reported in the National Review on July 4, 2016

Burma Shave
User avatar
gilly32
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 754
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2005 6:38 am
Location: Medina

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby JustaShooter » Mon Dec 12, 2016 9:56 am

gilly32 wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:- Grants political subdivisions the authority to allow concealed carry in their government buildings.




Earlier versions of the bill granted the ability to carry into libraries. Was that provision removed and would it now fall under this?

The earlier version that allowed concealed carry into any government facility that did not have security personnel and security measures at the entrance (which would have included libraries) was dropped, and the version that passed requires the city/township/whatever to actively allow it by passing a local ordnance, etc.
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: 4507
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby FormerNavy » Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:05 am

JustaShooter wrote:
gilly32 wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:- Grants political subdivisions the authority to allow concealed carry in their government buildings.




Earlier versions of the bill granted the ability to carry into libraries. Was that provision removed and would it now fall under this?

The earlier version that allowed concealed carry into any government facility that did not have security personnel and security measures at the entrance (which would have included libraries) was dropped, and the version that passed requires the city/township/whatever to actively allow it by passing a local ordnance, etc.



I'm sure they will be lining up to do just that... right behind all the colleges and universities that are going to now allow concealed carry.
User avatar
FormerNavy
 
Posts: 2201
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: Southwest Ohio

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby JustaShooter » Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:07 am

FormerNavy wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:The earlier version that allowed concealed carry into any government facility that did not have security personnel and security measures at the entrance (which would have included libraries) was dropped, and the version that passed requires the city/township/whatever to actively allow it by passing a local ordnance, etc.



I'm sure they will be lining up to do just that... right behind all the colleges and universities that are going to now allow concealed carry.


My thoughts exactly.
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: 4507
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby FormerNavy » Tue Dec 13, 2016 8:24 am

Mustang380gal wrote:At this point, it almost would be better if Kasich would veto it. I think we'd have less to fix that way. Now we have what they broke, and the things that we were trying to get, too.


Except that it would be two years before anything got done... nothing ever happens on CHL stuff until the end of the two year term. That's what is most frustrating to me...
User avatar
FormerNavy
 
Posts: 2201
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 3:19 pm
Location: Southwest Ohio

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby Mustang380gal » Tue Dec 13, 2016 9:26 am

FormerNavy wrote:
Mustang380gal wrote:At this point, it almost would be better if Kasich would veto it. I think we'd have less to fix that way. Now we have what they broke, and the things that we were trying to get, too.


Except that it would be two years before anything got done... nothing ever happens on CHL stuff until the end of the two year term. That's what is most frustrating to me...


But that means that there are two years that they have to use the new broken law to arrest and jail people.

I am not happy about things taking 2 years, either.

We'd probably be better off if laws were arranged in bullet point, and there were about 100 of them rather than this mess that we have now.
RIFLEWOMAN, wife of a RIFLEMAN, mom of 9, NRA life member, OFCC Patron member!
User avatar
Mustang380gal
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 6689
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:18 am
Location: Amish Country, Wayne County

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby JonasM » Tue Dec 13, 2016 9:42 am

I'm looking at the bright side - the change to the school zone rules is YUGE for me. My daughter's school is in a rural area, with a long driveway - no possible way to park outside without getting the car towed and inviting questions from every single person who sees me. If I have to go there for an event after work, then I am disarmed all day. I'll take what I can get at this point.
JonasM
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 6:05 pm
Location: Cuyahoga Co, OH

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby Stryker74 » Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:16 am

JonasM wrote:I'm looking at the bright side - the change to the school zone rules is YUGE for me. My daughter's school is in a rural area, with a long driveway - no possible way to park outside without getting the car towed and inviting questions from every single person who sees me. If I have to go there for an event after work, then I am disarmed all day. I'll take what I can get at this point.


This is the only shiny side of it all for me as well.

This would allow me to take my wife to work, as well as to participate in my son's school activities without being disarmed during the trip. (For instance, traveling to other schools in Ohio for his ROTC meets.)
Aaron

NRA Life Endowment Member
USCCA Certified Instructor
NRA Certified Instructor - Pistol, Refuse To Be A Victim
NRA Range Safety Officer

http://www.techarms-training.com


Want to become more active with OFCC, and the fight for your rights? Click the link to find out how!
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=64852
User avatar
Stryker74
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 1468
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 8:15 pm
Location: Grove City, Ohio

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby Brian D. » Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:38 am

About the school premises prohibition: Am I the only one who, while traveling around unfamiliar parts of Ohio, turned down a road to make a U-turn or stop to glance at my map/GPS, only to realize that it was the entrance to an elementary or high school property? Yeah no harm no foul but still, my brain said "Oops, instant felon, three hots and a cot for you the next couple years". That is completely ridiculous, there are circumstances where I could maim or kill someone with the same vehicle and not get that kind of punishment.

Maybe I should just get a few of the fence sitting Representatives and Senators to take a road trips with me across the state.
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!

********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
Brian D.
 
Posts: 14683
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: HB 48: Remove some CPZs; modify affirmative defense

Postby JonasM » Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:43 am

You're not the only one who has done that. :)
JonasM
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 6:05 pm
Location: Cuyahoga Co, OH

PreviousNext

Return to Tweed Ring's Ohio Politics and Legislation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron