HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

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

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

User avatar
Chuck
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 4753
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Chuck »

ALL bills require THREE hearings in each chamber
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)
Liberty
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Akron

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Liberty »

JustaShooter wrote:Guys & gals it is my firm belief that you are making a mountain out of a molehill. The Dangerous Ordnance definition *already* contains the following:
2923.11 (K)(4) Any firearm, rocket launcher, mortar, artillery piece, grenade, mine, bomb, torpedo, or similar weapon, designed and manufactured for military purposes, and the ammunition for that weapon;
If the new language would open the door to prosecution for possession of an AR or AK pattern rifle, so would this. This section would *also* open the door to prosecution for possession of certain handguns - you know, like the 1911, Beretta 9mm, etc., unless the sporting exception applies, no?

If the sporting exception covers these, then it will also cover the Shockwave screw-up.
Semiautomatic AK and AR style firearms are not designed and manufactured for military purposes. They do not have the fun switch. They are designed and manufactured for civilian purposes. Likewise the ammo, which is why XM193 is sold to civilians while the military use to use the M193. Therefore, they do not fit the definition of R.C. § 2923.11(K)(4). The new language places all firearms over 26 inches in the exact same legal category as automatic firearms and sawed off shotguns. Citizens in Ohio are prosecuted all the time for possession of automatic firearms and sawed off shotguns.

Overriding that veto is playing with fire!
Liberty
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Akron

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Liberty »

Chuck wrote:ALL bills require THREE hearings in each chamber
Which they could do in under a month if they wanted to, and passing a clean new bill could take the exact same amount of time as passing a bill to move subsection 7 from subdivision K to subdivision L.

If they override the veto they want an assault weapons ban!
User avatar
Chuck
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 4753
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Chuck »

Watch live
http://www.ohiosenate.gov/live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.ohiohouse.gov/live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
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)
Liberty
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Akron

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Liberty »

They could have and should have moved subsection 7 from subdivision K to subdivision L the day after the screw-up so they could have sent what we wanted to King Kasich. They knew about it. Why didn't they?
kcclark
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1253
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 1:16 pm
Location: Central Ohio

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by kcclark »

Chuck wrote:ALL bills require THREE hearings in each chamber
My memory is Strickland got corporal punishment banned by putting it in the 2009 budget and the budget hearings never mentioned the corporal punishment language. I definitely disagreed with Strickland on this one but it does show a path to get things changed early in the year.
Liberty
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Akron

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Liberty »

Well, it is done. I hope you guys have the political clout to get the incoming legislature to fix it.
MrMagoo
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 1465
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:54 pm
Location: Delaware County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by MrMagoo »

A senator asked me today for our wish list for next year, he wants me to call his office next week and wants it before the Republican caucus in the middle of the month. We also have a tentative appointment (depending on the House schedule) with Rep. Kris Jordan in the middle of the month.

ORC 2923.11 (which contains the problem language) was not the original language of the bill. This section of the ORC was inserted while it was in committee in the House.

I'm going to send an email today to some folks about fixing the screw up in language and how it can be fixed based on what I'm seeing in this thread. They may not see it till next year but it'll be in their in box.

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
Liberty
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Akron

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Liberty »

It might be worthy to note that the legislative analysis and comparative analyses are are written as if subsection 7 is in subdivision L and not K.

Also, it would be nice if one of the chambers or both would pass a non-binding resolution this year just stating that the votes were based upon the belief that the subsection 7 was in subdivision L and not K. And a bill to fix it should contain a provision to nullify and/or expunge any convictions based upon the mix-up in the language--just in case the fix takes too long.
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by bignflnut »

The Ohio General Assembly has voted to override Gov. John Kasich’s veto on, HB 228, a bill that would revamp the way the state handles self-defense cases in court.

The law shifts the burden of proof in self-defense cases from the defense to the prosecution. It had strong support from pro-gun groups, who said this would put Ohio in step with every other state in the country.

On Thursday, the Ohio House and Ohio Senate each voted with a two-thirds majority to overturn Kasich's veto.
Congrats to Chuck and those who suffered the fools in the Statehouse during the 132GA! Consider Kasich's hind quarters cherry red.

Staying classy..."somebody" ripped off Chuck's line:
...said shifting the burden ensures that someone is "innocent until proven guilty… one of the pillars of our nation's legal system.”
Now there MUST be another bill that flies through the Statehouse to be signed by the newly minted Governor early in the 133GA.
Here's to packing it to the brim with the full agenda:

Constitutional Carry / Ending Notification/Databases
Banning CPZs / Legalizing RKBA everywhere in the State (individual businesses can still call the cops to remove "trespassers", but the State will not prosecute it as harshly)
...and So Much More...

“In the long run men only hit what they aim at. Therefore, though they should fail immediately, they had better aim at something high.”
You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.
What you win people with, you win people to.
Git-R-Done
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
User avatar
Chuck
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 4753
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Chuck »

http://ohioccw.org/images/The%20problem ... 20link.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The problem within HB 228
As passed by the House, the following verbiage was included in ORC
2923.11 (L), which are items NOT considered dangerous ordnance:
“(7) Any firearm with an overall length of at least twenty- six inches that
is approved for sale
by the federal bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives
under the "Gun Control Act of
1968," 82 Stat. 1213, 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(3), but that is found by the
bureau not to be regulated under
the "National Firearms Act," 68A Stat. 725 (1934), 26 U.S.C. 5845(a).”
During the committee amendment process in the Senate, the above
verbiage was moved to ORC 2923.11(K), a list of items which ARE
considered dangerous ordnance.
We believe this to be a clerical error that no one noticed until the bill had
been sent to the governor for his veto.
This explicitly classifies as dangerous ordnance the very items
lawmakers intended to legalize. Further, based on the definition of
“sporting use”, this may also reclassify many other long guns currently
in common use as dangerous ordnance, which requires additional
licensing to legally possess.
All versions of the bill throughout the legislative process can be found
here:
https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legisl ... 132-HB-228" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ohioans for Concealed Carry would like to see this corrected via
emergency legislation by the next GA before HB 228 becomes law.
This is an official OFCC statement
Feel free to share
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)
Aesinsp
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 8:27 am
Location: Central Ohio

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Aesinsp »

Shared with my legislators.
Thank you Chuck.
"If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism."
Thomas Sowell, Knowledge And Decisions

Never forget and Never again, Molon labe
Liberty
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:38 pm
Location: Akron

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by Liberty »

Someone might want to contact the FOP lobbyists who lobbied against HB 228 and let them know that the language mishap will effect their members if it does not get fixed. The LE exception to the dangerous ordnance prohibition states the following:
Division (A) of this section does not apply to: (1) Officers, agents, or employees of this or any other state or the United States, members of the armed forces of the United States or the organized militia of this or any other state, and law enforcement officers, to the extent that any such person is authorized to acquire, have, carry, or use dangerous ordnance and is acting within the scope of the person's duties. R.C. § 2923.17(C)(1).
Many LE officers have AR-15's for private use, which could be classified as non-sporting and therefore felonious to possess. Many LE officers who possess AR-15's do not use them while "acting within the scope of the [their] duties." Many departments do not allow such, and many other departments that do, do not have all of their officers properly trained and certified in order for them to use a patrol rifle while "acting within the scope of the [their] duties."

Having the FOP on board with the fix might help get it done before HB 228 takes effect.
MrMagoo
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 1465
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:54 pm
Location: Delaware County

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by MrMagoo »

"Division )A) of this section does not apply to:"

What ORC section are you referring to? The screw up in Sub HB 228 was in ORC 2923.11 sections (K) and (L). There is nothing in 2923.11 regarding LE exceptions. Please let me know ASAP.

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
User avatar
schmieg
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5751
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 11:11 pm
Location: Madeira, Ohio

Re: HB 228: Stand your ground + other changes

Post by schmieg »

MrMagoo wrote:"Division )A) of this section does not apply to:"

What ORC section are you referring to? The screw up in Sub HB 228 was in ORC 2923.11 sections (K) and (L). There is nothing in 2923.11 regarding LE exceptions. Please let me know ASAP.

Gary
I think what he is saying is that police officers will also be affected in their private use of personal firearms and that it is clearly delineated in 2923.17.
-- Mike

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
Post Reply