HB 272 - 135th General Assembly

[kcclark]

Bill co-sponsor, Republican Representative Adam Mathews, says it protects citizens' Second Amendment rights. He also says the bill does not in any way affect a courthouse that performs only as a courthouse.

"This is for multi-use buildings in our smaller municipalities that are good stewards of taxpayer dollars, that instead of having multiple buildings for electric, for tax, for city council and the court," Mathews said. "When court is not in session, because we know how important that is to have safe, secure judicial proceedings, we're allowed to recognize our concealed carry rights and our Constitutional rights when court is not in session."

https://www.10tv.com/article/news/local ... ce0d46491e

https://ohiohouse.gov/legislation/135/hb272

[FormerNavy]

Ummm.. when are these other departments open (water, electric, etc...) that court is not in session?? I would have thought those hours and days would mostly overlap.

[M-Quigley]

Ummm.. when are these other departments open (water, electric, etc...) that court is not in session?? I would have thought those hours and days would mostly overlap.

I was thinking the same thing. My county's courthouse has other county offices in it, and court is in session at least part of the day every weekday.
On the weekends those non court offices aren't open anyway.

[Brian D.]

On its surface I'd call this an example of "Seinfeld legislation". A bill about nothing.

[M-Quigley]

Since there are Democrats who claim to want to reform Ohio's gun laws after the Maine mass shooting, I find myself in the position where I to, want to reform at least one Ohio gun law. It's not something that will prevent a mass shooting from stopping, but might make a mass shooting less deadly, in fact has been proven to make a mass shooting less deadly in other states with different laws. I'm referring to the part of Ohio law that the so called
"no guns" signs carry the force of law. No innocent people were carrying at either of the 2 places in the Maine shooting. If someone had been carrying and shot back, the mass murderer would at least been interfered with, or maybe stopped altogether. This has been documented to happen in other cases.

In the part of Ohio where I live, I have the option of giving my money to businesses in Ohio or Indiana. If I want to go to a Meier in Indiana, I'm not going to automatically risk a criminal charge if I happen to have a concealed handgun on me. Same for the nearest bowling alleys near me. Same for Kentucky. Ohio politicians should look at Kentucky and Indiana laws on this and change the law in order to help save lives.

Example of Kentucky law

No Firearm” signs in Kentucky have no force of law unless they are posted on property that is specifically
mentioned in State Law as being off limits to those with a Permit/License to Carry. If you are in a place not
specifically mentioned in the law that is posted and they ask you to leave, you must leave. If you refuse to
leave then you are breaking the law and can be charged. Even if the property is not posted and you are asked
to leave you must leave.

[Brian D.]

Since there are Democrats who claim to want to reform Ohio's gun laws after the Maine mass shooting, I find myself in the position where I to, want to reform at least one Ohio gun law. It's not something that will prevent a mass shooting from stopping, but might make a mass shooting less deadly, in fact has been proven to make a mass shooting less deadly in other states with different laws. I'm referring to the part of Ohio law that the so called
"no guns" signs carry the force of law. No innocent people were carrying at either of the 2 places in the Maine shooting. If someone had been carrying and shot back, the mass murderer would at least been interfered with, or maybe stopped altogether. This has been documented to happen in other cases.

In the part of Ohio where I live, I have the option of giving my money to businesses in Ohio or Indiana. If I want to go to a Meier in Indiana, I'm not going to automatically risk a criminal charge if I happen to have a concealed handgun on me. Same for the nearest bowling alleys near me. Same for Kentucky. Ohio politicians should look at Kentucky and Indiana laws on this and change the law in order to help save lives.

Example of Kentucky law

No Firearm” signs in Kentucky have no force of law unless they are posted on property that is specifically
mentioned in State Law as being off limits to those with a Permit/License to Carry. If you are in a place not
specifically mentioned in the law that is posted and they ask you to leave, you must leave. If you refuse to
leave then you are breaking the law and can be charged. Even if the property is not posted and you are asked
to leave you must leave.

I almost didn't quote your post because of length, but was hesitant to chop it up, because it's good. Obviously I agree.

Your idea has been brought up before, to our allies on both sides
of the Statehouse. There always seem to an undertow of resistance among the RINOs, and certainly the small number of Democrats there give it thumbs down.

(The above is merely the view from my saddle. We have some folks here and at Buckeye Firearms Association that spent way more time communicating with Columbus than I have over the past two decades.)

On the other hand, through the years I've read very few reports of police just arresting a somehow-discovered concealed carrier on the spot, without telling the carrier to leave, first. Especially in the last decade or more. I believe part of the reason is that police are often loathe to make this sort of arrest.

[M-Quigley]

Since there are Democrats who claim to want to reform Ohio's gun laws after the Maine mass shooting, I find myself in the position where I to, want to reform at least one Ohio gun law. It's not something that will prevent a mass shooting from stopping, but might make a mass shooting less deadly, in fact has been proven to make a mass shooting less deadly in other states with different laws. I'm referring to the part of Ohio law that the so called
"no guns" signs carry the force of law. No innocent people were carrying at either of the 2 places in the Maine shooting. If someone had been carrying and shot back, the mass murderer would at least been interfered with, or maybe stopped altogether. This has been documented to happen in other cases.

In the part of Ohio where I live, I have the option of giving my money to businesses in Ohio or Indiana. If I want to go to a Meier in Indiana, I'm not going to automatically risk a criminal charge if I happen to have a concealed handgun on me. Same for the nearest bowling alleys near me. Same for Kentucky. Ohio politicians should look at Kentucky and Indiana laws on this and change the law in order to help save lives.

Example of Kentucky law

No Firearm” signs in Kentucky have no force of law unless they are posted on property that is specifically
mentioned in State Law as being off limits to those with a Permit/License to Carry. If you are in a place not
specifically mentioned in the law that is posted and they ask you to leave, you must leave. If you refuse to
leave then you are breaking the law and can be charged. Even if the property is not posted and you are asked
to leave you must leave.

I almost didn't quote your post because of length, but was hesitant to chop it up, because it's good. Obviously I agree.

Your idea has been brought up before, to our allies on both sides
of the Statehouse. There always seem to an undertow of resistance among the RINOs, and certainly the small number of Democrats there give it thumbs down.

(The above is merely the view from my saddle. We have some folks here and at Buckeye Firearms Association that spent way more time communicating with Columbus than I have over the past two decades.)

I realize that it has been brought up and shot down before, and probably will continue to be. I was only making the point that since Democrats have recently been misusing the tragedy in Maine to advance a change in the gun laws, I thought this particular change would be something that might actually do something positive, since Maine's laws are like Ohio's in this regard.

On the other hand, through the years I've read very few reports of police just arresting a somehow-discovered concealed carrier on the spot, without telling the carrier to leave, first. Especially in the last decade or more. I believe part of the reason is that police are often loathe to make this sort of arrest.

I've not heard of any cases where someone has been automatically arrested either at a private business. Heck, if you conceal it well, they're not likely to know anyway. That's not really the issue though. For law abiding carriers, the key words are "law abiding". Most concealed carriers I know simply refuse to go into a place with a no guns sign in Ohio, they don't want to take the risk and they are law abiding, even if they disagree with the law.

Like for example the woman in Texas (Suzanna Hupp?) who obeyed the law and left her handgun in the car and watched her parents get murdered by a guy with a handgun. She said afterwards that if she had known that there would've been a mass shooting she would've violated the law and been able to stop the killer, but then hindsight is always 20/20 If you know a place is going to have a mass shooting you shouldn't even go there and call 911 beforehand, but people carry because they don't know when or where. I just don't think non criminal concealed carriers should have to worry about the possibility of an automatic arrest and having to decide whether to technically violate the law or not. Can you imagine how different the Indy mall mass shooting outcome would've been if the mall's no guns sign or policy had the force of law and Eli Dicken decided either to not go inside or go in unarmed?

Where I live now it isn't as much an issue for me personally, because very few business have no gun signs, but that's not the case where I used to live. Just to use bowling alleys as an example, every bowling alley I used to go to when I lived in an urban area in Ohio has a no guns sign. Not too long ago I met up with an old acquaintance who invited me out bowling some night, but of course the bowling alley is a so called no guns zone. I still might go since he'll be there and said he'll have 2 guns, one of which I can use if needed, because I guess the laws don't apply to him? (retired cop)

[Brian D.]

Agreed.

[FormerNavy]

I've not heard of any cases where someone has been automatically arrested either at a private business. Heck, if you conceal it well, they're not likely to know anyway.

I think we may be asking the wrong question with regard to whether or not you would be arrested without being asked to leave. I have seen various statements at different times along the lines of not having heard of people being arrested without being asked to leave first.

I think the right question to ask is, how many instances have you heard of where someone was caught carrying in a CPZ and were asked to leave before being arrested? I think by and large, carriers who choose to ignore the signs don't get caught... so are we not hearing about CCW holders being arrested straight away (without being asked to leave first) because police ask first.... or just because they aren't really ever caught?

I'm more interested in whether or not people have heard of cases where a CCW holder had an interaction with police in a CPZ... and was simply asked to leave, versus being arrested.

[FormerNavy]

Since there are Democrats who claim to want to reform Ohio's gun laws after the Maine mass shooting, I find myself in the position where I to, want to reform at least one Ohio gun law. It's not something that will prevent a mass shooting from stopping, but might make a mass shooting less deadly, in fact has been proven to make a mass shooting less deadly in other states with different laws. I'm referring to the part of Ohio law that the so called
"no guns" signs carry the force of law. No innocent people were carrying at either of the 2 places in the Maine shooting. If someone had been carrying and shot back, the mass murderer would at least been interfered with, or maybe stopped altogether. This has been documented to happen in other cases.

In the part of Ohio where I live, I have the option of giving my money to businesses in Ohio or Indiana. If I want to go to a Meier in Indiana, I'm not going to automatically risk a criminal charge if I happen to have a concealed handgun on me. Same for the nearest bowling alleys near me. Same for Kentucky. Ohio politicians should look at Kentucky and Indiana laws on this and change the law in order to help save lives.

Example of Kentucky law

I almost didn't quote your post because of length, but was hesitant to chop it up, because it's good. Obviously I agree.

Your idea has been brought up before, to our allies on both sides
of the Statehouse. There always seem to an undertow of resistance among the RINOs, and certainly the small number of Democrats there give it thumbs down.

(The above is merely the view from my saddle. We have some folks here and at Buckeye Firearms Association that spent way more time communicating with Columbus than I have over the past two decades.)

I realize that it has been brought up and shot down before, and probably will continue to be. I was only making the point that since Democrats have recently been misusing the tragedy in Maine to advance a change in the gun laws, I thought this particular change would be something that might actually do something positive, since Maine's laws are like Ohio's in this regard.

On the other hand, through the years I've read very few reports of police just arresting a somehow-discovered concealed carrier on the spot, without telling the carrier to leave, first. Especially in the last decade or more. I believe part of the reason is that police are often loathe to make this sort of arrest.

I've not heard of any cases where someone has been automatically arrested either at a private business. Heck, if you conceal it well, they're not likely to know anyway. That's not really the issue though. For law abiding carriers, the key words are "law abiding". Most concealed carriers I know simply refuse to go into a place with a no guns sign in Ohio, they don't want to take the risk and they are law abiding, even if they disagree with the law.

Like for example the woman in Texas (Suzanna Hupp?) who obeyed the law and left her handgun in the car and watched her parents get murdered by a guy with a handgun. She said afterwards that if she had known that there would've been a mass shooting she would've violated the law and been able to stop the killer, but then hindsight is always 20/20 If you know a place is going to have a mass shooting you shouldn't even go there and call 911 beforehand, but people carry because they don't know when or where. I just don't think non criminal concealed carriers should have to worry about the possibility of an automatic arrest and having to decide whether to technically violate the law or not. Can you imagine how different the Indy mall mass shooting outcome would've been if the mall's no guns sign or policy had the force of law and Eli Dicken decided either to not go inside or go in unarmed?

Where I live now it isn't as much an issue for me personally, because very few business have no gun signs, but that's not the case where I used to live. Just to use bowling alleys as an example, every bowling alley I used to go to when I lived in an urban area in Ohio has a no guns sign. Not too long ago I met up with an old acquaintance who invited me out bowling some night, but of course the bowling alley is a so called no guns zone. I still might go since he'll be there and said he'll have 2 guns, one of which I can use if needed, because I guess the laws don't apply to him? (retired cop)

I would love to see the demise of the criminality of violating a CPZ sign... but right now I think we have something bigger to worry about. The Libs have woken up and realized that modifying the Ohio constitution is the way to go (to wit: Issue 1 & 2).... and I wouldn't be surprised at all if this is the new avenue that gun control will attempt to take. And honestly, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they could get it to pass. As K says in Men in Black, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

[M-Quigley]

I would love to see the demise of the criminality of violating a CPZ sign... but right now I think we have something bigger to worry about. The Libs have woken up and realized that modifying the Ohio constitution is the way to go (to wit: Issue 1 & 2).... and I wouldn't be surprised at all if this is the new avenue that gun control will attempt to take. And honestly, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they could get it to pass. As K says in Men in Black, "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

Actually the anti gunners had already thought of this, before this election, it's just that their polling numbers weren't what they wanted in Ohio on the subject of gun control. I have a far left liberal Democrat relative who is a member of MDA and other anti gun groups. She was almost glowing over the results yesterday, and she literally said that she hopes this will lead to "common sense" ""gun safety" measures being enacted by the people, and maybe turning the statehouse from red to blue. I don't normally challenge her on anything she says because I want to hear what the other side is thinking, regardless of whether I agree with it or not. Also because I know it won't change her mind no matter what I say. What's that old saying, "Don't try to teach a pig to sing." ?

Anyway, my thought when I heard this was "Not so fast". The polling supported issues 1 & 2 well before election day, and she didn't have any results of any new polling yet. I thought yesterday that the election wasn't a approval of more government restrictions, more like the opposite. I listened to many women on issue 1, conservative republican women and men, and there was a surprising number that on issue one specifically, that the bill that the statehouse passed and the governor signed went too far. It didn't help when the story of the little girl who was raped and got pregnant had to go to Indy to get an abortion. I know many people in my area who are officially Republicans but their political views are closer to libertarian than the far right on every issue.

When I woke up this morning I saw this, sounds relevant.

https://www.whio.com/news/local/what-pa ... LBFFR4LQY/

News Center 7′s Xavier Hershovitz talked with a political expert about what the passing of both issues means for Ohio’s future.

“I think it goes back partly to the freedom issue,” Dr. Marc Clauson, professor of history and law at Cedarville University said.

He said with both issues voters made clear they don’t want the government making personal decisions.

“Both I think turned on that kind of concept to freedom to do what we want to do based on our own preferences,” Clauson said.