HB142 dead for this session?

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

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
zeko
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Morrow County

HB142 dead for this session?

Post by zeko »

From all I can see and read, it looks like HB142 never made it out of the Senate's Government Oversight and Reform committee. Does anyone have an idea what the specific hangup was? They certainly had enough meetings to discuss it thoroughly.

I remember hearing that the reason it was modified in the first place was that former Speaker of the House Cliff Rosenberger didn't like the original form and wouldn't have let it come to the floor. Now that he's gone, might a rerun of the original form have a better chance?

Zeko
User avatar
rickt
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
Posts: 3164
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:35 am
Location: Cuyahoga County

Re: HB142 dead for this session?

Post by rickt »

The committee has no more hearings scheduled so it appears dead.

I blame the Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police, Buckeye State Sheriff's Association and the Fraternal Order of Police of Ohio.
User avatar
Chuck
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 4753
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: HB142 dead for this session?

Post by Chuck »

zeko wrote:From all I can see and read, it looks like HB142 never made it out of the Senate's Government Oversight and Reform committee. Does anyone have an idea what the specific hangup was? They certainly had enough meetings to discuss it thoroughly.

I remember hearing that the reason it was modified in the first place was that former Speaker of the House Cliff Rosenberger didn't like the original form and wouldn't have let it come to the floor. Now that he's gone, might a rerun of the original form have a better chance?

Zeko
Zeko,
I went to my favorite senator and asked him to restore the original language on HB 142, and incorporate HB 233 into whatever the Senate did end up passing.
He promised to run it up the flagpole and see what people said.
He wondered why we waited so long to bring it up; I explained that now that House leadership changed we wanted to try the original language again.
After the first two days he told me we were gaining a reputation for being unreasonable because we wouldn't compromise on the language.
At that time, HB 228 had language that made failing to notify a Minor Misdemeanor anyway, so we told them we would rather not pass it and start over next session.
So what do they do but strip the MM for failing to notify from HB 228 at the last minute, along with the other, more well know stuff.

And after the deadline passed for having time to over ride the governor's veto, they unexpectedly put HB 142 on the schedule.
We made a couple phone calls, and I managed to get a copy of an amendment someone was thinking of proposing.
Restoring the original language wasn't a part of it, but language for removing the duty to retreat was.
It was all political theater, and no amendment was ever proposed.
But it kept us on our toes, watching.

*EDIT: I wish Tweed Ring were here.
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
DontTreadOnMe
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
Location: SW Ohio

Re: HB142 dead for this session?

Post by DontTreadOnMe »

I don't believe 228 as passed by the house ever had language making failure to notify a MM. It made unlicensed concealed carry a MM, but from what I saw the version passed by the house retained the M1 for notification. I commented on that back on Nov. 14 http://www.ohioccwforums.org/viewtopic. ... 0#p4394427" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
Chuck
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 4753
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: HB142 dead for this session?

Post by Chuck »

You may very well be right. I got confused on that once before
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)
WestonDon
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 2680
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2011 3:30 pm
Location: Wood county

Re: HB142 dead for this session?

Post by WestonDon »

Chuck wrote:
zeko wrote:From all I can see and read, it looks like HB142 never made it out of the Senate's Government Oversight and Reform committee. Does anyone have an idea what the specific hangup was? They certainly had enough meetings to discuss it thoroughly.

I remember hearing that the reason it was modified in the first place was that former Speaker of the House Cliff Rosenberger didn't like the original form and wouldn't have let it come to the floor. Now that he's gone, might a rerun of the original form have a better chance?

Zeko
Zeko,
I went to my favorite senator and asked him to restore the original language on HB 142, and incorporate HB 233 into whatever the Senate did end up passing.
He promised to run it up the flagpole and see what people said.
He wondered why we waited so long to bring it up; I explained that now that House leadership changed we wanted to try the original language again.
After the first two days he told me we were gaining a reputation for being unreasonable because we wouldn't compromise on the language.
At that time, HB 228 had language that made failing to notify a Minor Misdemeanor anyway, so we told them we would rather not pass it and start over next session.
So what do they do but strip the MM for failing to notify from HB 228 at the last minute, along with the other, more well know stuff.

And after the deadline passed for having time to over ride the governor's veto, they unexpectedly put HB 142 on the schedule.
We made a couple phone calls, and I managed to get a copy of an amendment someone was thinking of proposing.
Restoring the original language wasn't a part of it, but language for removing the duty to retreat was.
It was all political theater, and no amendment was ever proposed.
But it kept us on our toes, watching.

*EDIT: I wish Tweed Ring were here.
For what it's worth, it wasn't compromise they were asking for. It was total capitulation with a side order of "thank you sir, may I have another".
I believe in American exceptianalism
Fear the government that fears your guns
NRA endowment life member
zeko
Posts: 160
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Morrow County

Re: HB142 dead for this session?

Post by zeko »

Thanks for the info . . . I guess we'll have to say what the Brooklyn Dodgers (yeah I'm that old) used to say . . . "Wait til next year" . . .

Zeko
Post Reply