DMV and Constitutional Carry

[ummmreally]

Ok, so I went to the DMV, I was carrying, and I see the stupid sign outside that says you cannot have a firearm on the premises, so I had to go lock the firearm in the car. Does not constitutional carry override these laws. "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." To me this sign, and any laws behind it do infringe. Especially after what happened in Buffalo, and Uvale. I believe that for my own safety and the safety of those around me, I will not leave the house unless I'm armed. I think in the case of a DMV, what is to stop a criminal who illegally obtained a rifle from coming into the DMV and start shooting the place up. These signs are not going to stop them. So why should law-abiding citizens have to deal with this. None of the restrictive laws they put in place have done anything to stop any violent criminals.

[evan price]

ORC 2923.126 G.3.b specifically speaks of Deputy Registrars. Most BMVs are contractors and private businesses on top of that and may post.

[JustaShooter]

Ok, so I went to the DMV, I was carrying, and I see the stupid sign outside that says you cannot have a firearm on the premises, so I had to go lock the firearm in the car. Does not constitutional carry override these laws.

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: No, because what Ohio now has, and most other states have, is not "constitutional carry" even though that's what people call it. What we have is "unlicensed carry", a law that allows us to carry without a license if we meet certain requirements. So, the law still prohibits carry in the same places now as it did before the new unlicensed carry law took effect.