https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legisl ... 133-HB-156H. B. No. 156 - Representative Schaffer (R).
Cosponsors: Representatives Becker (R), Lang (R), Hood (R), Ginter (R), Seitz (R).
To amend section 2923.126 of the Revised Code to grant civil immunity to nonprofit corporations and persons associated with them for certain injuries, deaths, or losses resulting from the carrying of handguns.
Support The Forums:
The forums have been hosted for some time now out of my pocket. We are coming up on the annual domain renewal for ohioccwforums.org and I pay roughly $20/month to keep the forums online. I do this to maintain the long-standing history of discussions here indexed in Google, and so that people have a place to discuss this topic outside of modern social media censorship. If you enjoy the forums and you'd like to help offset the cost, please consider a venmo donation hereH.B. 156: Grant nonprofit immunity for allowing carry
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
-
rickt
- OFCC Member
- Posts: 3164
- Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:35 am
- Location: Cuyahoga County
H.B. 156: Grant nonprofit immunity for allowing carry
-
M-Quigley
- Posts: 5024
- Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
- Location: Western Ohio
Re: H.B. 156: Grant nonprofit immunity for allowing carry
For some reason I couldn't view the legislation after getting to the website. What is the purpose or need of this legislation? Don't businesses and organizations already have immunity if they allow CC now?
I realize it says "persons" , does that mean they want immunity for their employee also if the employee does something negligent with a firearm?
I realize it says "persons" , does that mean they want immunity for their employee also if the employee does something negligent with a firearm?
-
djthomas
- Posts: 5961
- Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 11:09 am
Re: H.B. 156: Grant nonprofit immunity for allowing carry
I wondered the same, but I suspect it has to do with the fact that the current exemption only protects private employers. While many non-profits are private employers there are some that are 100% volunteer and have no employees or even contractors.
I'm pleased to see that the bill provides immunity for a licensee's actions and for the non-profit's decision to allow a licensee to bring a firearm, but does not provide immunity for the decision to prohibit carry. Now if only they could remove that part from the private employer section too...
If this bill gets any hearings I'm sure there will be pressure from various non-profits to give them the "decision to prohibit" exemption as well. It bears watching.
I'm pleased to see that the bill provides immunity for a licensee's actions and for the non-profit's decision to allow a licensee to bring a firearm, but does not provide immunity for the decision to prohibit carry. Now if only they could remove that part from the private employer section too...
If this bill gets any hearings I'm sure there will be pressure from various non-profits to give them the "decision to prohibit" exemption as well. It bears watching.