S.B. 140: Allows non-weapon knife carry

[rickt]

S. B. No. 140 - Senator Uecker (R).
Cosponsors: Senators Roegner (R), Huffman, M. (R), Obhof (R).
To amend sections 2923.12, 2923.18, and 2923.20 of the Revised Code to exempt knives not used as weapons from the prohibition against carrying
concealed weapons and to eliminate the prohibition against manufacturing, possessing for sale, selling, or furnishing certain weapons other than firearms
or dangerous ordnance.

https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legisl ... 133-SB-140

[JN01]

for purposes of this section, 'deadly weapon' or 'weapon' does not include any knife, razor, or cutting instrument if the instrument was not used as a weapon.

If you legally carried a knife and ended up using it in self-defense(as a weapon), would you at that point be guilty of carrying a (unauthorized) concealed weapon?

[JonasM]

No, silly. It only became a weapon when it was not concealed.

OK, snark aside, that's a very good question. What happens when my cardboard cutter is suddenly re-purposed?

[screwman]

If used in self defense, technically, it shouldn't be called a weapon.

[steves 50de]

S. B. No. 140 - Senator Uecker (R).
Cosponsors: Senators Roegner (R), Huffman, M. (R), Obhof (R).
To amend sections 2923.12, 2923.18, and 2923.20 of the Revised Code to exempt knives not used as weapons from the prohibition against carrying
concealed weapons and to eliminate the prohibition against manufacturing, possessing for sale, selling, or furnishing certain weapons other than firearms
or dangerous ordnance.

https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legisl ... 133-SB-140

[JustaShooter]

Who wrote this garbage? The only thing that makes any sense is the part that strikes the prohibition (largely ignored) in 2923.20 (A)(6) against making, possessing for sale, selling, or furnishing a switchblade/spring blade knife to non-LEO. The addition to 2923.12 makes no sense at all. I'd much rather have HB178's expansion to include all deadly weapons - and amend it to strike 2923.20 (A)(6).

[Morne]

The only thing that makes any sense is the part that strikes the prohibition (largely ignored) in 2923.20 (A)(6) against making, possessing for sale, selling, or furnishing a switchblade/spring blade knife to non-LEO.

That is the purpose of the bill.

[JustaShooter]

The only thing that makes any sense is the part that strikes the prohibition (largely ignored) in 2923.20 (A)(6) against making, possessing for sale, selling, or furnishing a switchblade/spring blade knife to non-LEO.

That is the purpose of the bill.

Then the 2923.12 & 18 changes should be removed, they make it look silly.

[JN01]

If used in self defense, technically, it shouldn't be called a weapon.

Why not? You are allowed to use a weapon to defend yourself from an act of deadly force.

The change doesn't seem much better than current law, which allows you to carry a knife as long as it is not "carried as or specifically adapted for use as a weapon" Under current law, if that knife you carry as a tool (assuming it is of a politically correct variety) is suddenly used In self defense you will be under legal scrutiny for the act, but there shouldn't be any weapon offense.

OK, so the amended law eliminates all those categories of "bad" knives, great. But assuming that you use one for self defense, and are found to be legally justified in doing so, what would prevent a politically motivated prosecutor from charging you with CCW under the new language?

Wisconsin simply repealed their prohibition on carrying concealed knives (and billys) as a weapon, but added a provision that excludes persons who may not legally possess a firearm. It's a little hard to understand exactly what the sponsor of SB 140 actually intends. I believe it also needs a preemption clause to counter all the municipal knife restrictions.

[JN01]

Here is a simple change:
2923.12 Carrying concealed weapons.
(A) No person shall knowingly carry or have, concealed on the person's person or concealed ready at hand, any of the following:
(1) A deadly weapon other than a handgun or a knife;

9.68 [Effective 12/28/2019] Right to bear arms - challenge to law.


(A) The individual right to keep and bear arms, being a fundamental individual right that predates the United States Constitution and Ohio Constitution, and being a constitutionally protected right in every part of Ohio, the general assembly finds the need to provide uniform laws throughout the state regulating the ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transport, storage, carrying, sale, other transfer, manufacture, taxation, keeping, and reporting of loss or theft of firearms, their components, and their ammunition. The general assembly also finds and declares that it is proper for law-abiding people to protect themselves, their families, and others from intruders and attackers without fear of prosecution or civil action for acting in defense of themselves or others. Except as specifically provided by the United States Constitution, Ohio Constitution, state law, or federal law, a person, without further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process, including by any ordinance, rule, regulation, resolution, practice, or other action or any threat of citation, prosecution, or other legal process, may own, possess, purchase, acquire, transport, store, carry, sell, transfer, manufacture, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition or any knife. Any such further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process interferes with the fundamental individual right described in this division and unduly inhibits law-abiding people from protecting themselves, their families, and others from intruders and attackers and from other legitimate uses of constitutionally protected firearms, including hunting and sporting activities, and the state by this section preempts, supersedes, and declares null and void any such further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process.

[JustaShooter]

Or even better, allow *any* deadly weapon, as HB 178 does (though, it currently lacks a corresponding fix to 9.68, one is being prepared to amend the bill.)

[rDigital]

There are serious legal disadvantages for calling a knife a weapon and not a tool. Knives are primarily used as tools, and in a last ditch effort can be adapted in an improvised weapon. We should be wary of such language that could come back to haunt us.

When was the last time you opened a box with a knife?

When was the last time you opened a box with a gun?

[schmieg]

When was the last time you opened a box with a gun?

Last time I went to my late brother-in-law's farm. Opened a box with a 12 gauge pump. Good thing there wasn't anything in it.

[JustaShooter]

There are serious legal disadvantages for calling a knife a weapon and not a tool. Knives are primarily used as tools, and in a last ditch effort can be adapted in an improvised weapon. We should be wary of such language that could come back to haunt us.

The problem is there are many knives that are "designed or specially adapted for use as a weapon" and carried by people as one. You can't tell me a karambit or many other similar blades are anything but weapons, and those that carry them do so as weapons. Trying to legislate otherwise is silly. The problem with current Ohio law is two-fold: first, there is no legal way to carry a knife that is a deadly weapon concealed, and the courts, not you, get to decide whether or not that knife you call a tool is a deadly weapon. Second, Ohio has no knife law preemption. HB178 will address both of those issues (once it is amended with the suggestions OFCC made).

[screwman]

I always carry an Irwin folding utility knife. Definitely a tool. Guess I’ll have to start carrying my concealed screwdriver.

Years ago, I was in Atlanta, along the road helping out a truck driver. The was a cop there. The guy needed a screwdriver, so I got out my leatherman. I thought the cop was gonna have an orgasm bustin’ me for a butterfly knife. After further inspection he realized it was a tool.