• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

New gun laws in Ohio

John A.

John A.

Unconstitutional laws are not laws.
Staff member
Administrator
Global Moderator
https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/gov-kasich-signs-sb-199-law

by Chad D. Baus
3:41pm Monday, December 19, 2016

Buckeye Firearms Association is pleased to report that Governor Kasich has signed Senator Joe Uecker's Amended Substitute Senate Bill 199 into law.

In addition to changes originally proposed by Sen. Uecker, SB 199 (Active Duty Armed Forces Concealed Carry/ Handgun Transfer) was amended to make a number of improvements to Ohio law, including expanding the number of places where Ohioans are allowed to exercise their Constitutional right to self-defense, and preventing employers from disallowing employees from keeping firearms locked in their personal vehicles on company property.

This victory was won by Ohio's 4 million gun owners against fierce opposition from the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, Ohio Council of Retail Merchants, Ohio Manufacturer's Association, Ohio Municipal League, Ohio Prosecuting Attorney's Association and Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police, not to mention gun ban extremists funded by a certain out-of-state billionaire. During debate on the bill, the latter misleadingly referred to the legislation as the "guns everywhere" bill. After the signing, the group issued a statement claiming the bill is a threat to "public safety." When nothing adverse occurs, of course, they won't be held to account by the media for their claims, just as their predecessors haven't been properly held to account for their own wild claims, made after passage of previous improvements to Ohio's concealed carry laws.

As passed, Am. Sub. SB 199 contains language addressing improvements to were originally proposed in both House Bill 48 (Eliminate many 'no-guns' victim zones), sponsored by Rep. Ron Maag, and Senate Bill 180 (Protect Workers' Constitutional Rights), also sponsored by Sen. Uecker.

The law allows for concealed carry in some places it is already legal to open carry guns. It removes several victim zones - places that are easy for bad people to kill many innocents - such as day-care facilities, private aircraft, and public areas of airport terminals - and it makes improvements to school safety zones by allowing CHL-holders to leave their firearms in their vehicles on school grounds, just as they've been allowed to do on college campuses for many years. The new law also also grants political subdivisions, colleges and universities the authority, if they choose, to allow people to legally possess concealed firearms.
The law also stipulates that a business entity, property owner, or public or private employer may not establish, maintain, or enforce a policy or rule that prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting a person who has been issued a valid concealed handgun license from transporting or storing a firearm or ammunition inside the person's privately owned motor vehicle.

And of course the bill still contains its original language, which allows active duty military members to carry concealed weapons without licenses provided they have military ID and proof that they successfully completed firearms training that meets or exceeds Ohio concealed carry law training requirements.
SB 199 passed the House by a 68-25 vote, and the Senate by a 22-8 vote.

Click here to read the exact language of the new law, which will take effect in about 90 days.
Buckeye Firearms Association would like to thank the Governor and the thousands upon thousands of people who responded to our calls for action to help move this bill through the legislature and to the Governor's desk.

Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Secretary, BFA PAC Vice Chairman, and an NRA-certified firearms instructor. He is the editor of BuckeyeFirearms.org, which received the Outdoor Writers of Ohio 2013 Supporting Member Award for Best Website.
 
I've been talking with Wright State University some. My son was accepted there last year.

They insist the law "still prohibits" concealed carry but later said it "permits (boards, officials and trustees) to make exemptions". I said, "so it allows for concealed carry"? They said no. I said "it allows for concealed if you vote to allow it"? They said yes. So I said, "so it allows it"? They got aggravated. Then insisted it still prohibits it. Not that I expect the liberal Wright State to allow it but even some among the campus police have spoken out and said they would prefer Wright State change their position.

It sounds to me that the chosen wording is meant to deflect the responsibilty of making a decision. And by saying that it's still prohibited the burden is put on the state and not the university.
 
From the Wright State Univ Facebook page:
Dated 12/20/2016

Wright State University
Like This Page · Yesterday ·
From the Wright State University Police Department:

The new state law, HB 48, that was adopted this week continues to prohibit the carrying of a concealed weapon on university and college campuses including on Wright State University's Dayton and Lake Campuses. The bill permits university and college boards of trustees to make an exception in policy. At this time, Wright State University policy does not permit the carrying of concealed weapons on campus
15542399_10154314630772736_6616121649677129024_n.jpg


From discussion thread on WSU FB:

Sydney Barnard Wright State University Exactly you keep repeating HB48, which deals with CCW, I'm saying as a state funded school you can't enforce or prosecute students open carrying guns.
Like · Reply · 22 hrs

Wright State University Yes, you're correct. Sorry, we misread the previous question. As we've stated above, somewhere in this post's comments, open carry is permitted, though a police presence/escort is likely to ensue. Contact the Wright State police for more info.

...

Wright State University Some people at Wright State are liberal, some are conservative. All of Wright State is gun-free.
------------------------------------------------

BR. The whole discussion is a fascinating read, especially since your son may be affected.
 
My son decided not to continue there though for totally unrelated reasons. We live in a small town and he didn't like being surrounded by 4000 strangers, shoulder to shoulder. He isn't into shooting, has no interest in firearms but even so dislikes the university's position.

I'll add that while he came back home, he's working full time and paying his own tuition for part time school.
 
Last edited:
Good for him.

I understand exactly why he feels that way. I was the same way when I was his age.

After I dropped out of that college after the first half of the year was done, I moved back closer to home, got a job, and worked a full time job and started going to vocational/college once I was accepted into the program until I got my electrical certification and a few other things.

It was a lot of work, and not much time for anything else for a few years, but I'm a better man now because of it. And that's not even considering my last semester I was working a full time job at night, going to school full time during the day, and got married and was an expecting Dad at the time I got my certification.

I'm real big for vocational/trade schools in some cases. Especially if you have a particular set of skillsets and enjoy actual working instead of sitting in an office.

I don't fall into the happy to work in an office category. Give me the great wide open spaces.

Actually, my dream job would have been a game warden or park ranger. I applied for game warden and traveled to the capital and took all the tests for that career twice. Passed both times with more than 90%, but was skipped over to hire veterans.
 
...

Wright State University Some people at Wright State are liberal, some are conservative. All of Wright State is gun-free.
------------------------------------------------
Click to expand...

...but with open carry. LOL! What would happen if half the student population had an "open carry day"? Not enough resources to escort everyone. And not enough hospital space for the other half to seek "safe space therapy".

It is good to have the ability to keep firearms in our vehicles now. Some places stated employees vehicles could be searched if the employer wished. BS! There is a company across from us with no-gun signs on the parking lot fence. You can tell the employees who carry...they park on the street.
 
In contrast to Wright in Ohio
_________________________________________________________________________
Gun-friendly Liberty University to open on-campus shooting range

Liberty University is planning to open a state-of-the-art shooting range on campus next fall as part of the conservative Evangelical Christian School’s commitment to promoting gun ownership and firearm sports.

University president Jerry Falwell Jr. said that Liberty’s new complex will feature pistol, rifle and shotgun facilities as well as an archery range built into the mountainside of the 7,000-acre campus near Lynchburg, Va. Falwell said the project will result in one of the most expansive firearms ranges on any U.S. college campus. The blueprints call for at least $1 million in construction and landscape improvements that will provide new opportunities for student clubs and athletic teams.
...
Falwell said that he hopes the shooting range will give students the opportunity to practice their aim. Falwell said that one of the reasons for the university’s aggressive posture on carrying firearms is so that the campus will be prepared in the event of an “active shooter” scenario. Falwell pointed out that that the 2007 mass shooting at Virginia Tech occurred just 85 miles west of his campus; he said the “gun-free zones” that encompass other Virginia universities make them vulnerable.

“It’s where the terrorists are most likely to strike,” Falwell said, adding that students and Liberty families approve of the university’s stance on firearms. “They don’t want to see anything happen here like at Virginia Tech, where nobody was able to fire back.”
imrs.php


Full article at:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...campus-shooting-range/?utm_term=.849247e1b056
 
J Falwell said:
. . . “gun-free zones” . . . make them vulnerable. . . . “It’s where the terrorists are most likely to strike,” . . .
Click to expand...

I don't always agree with Jerry Falwell but on this point he's got it right.

It is amazing how modern political correctness causes people to be blind to simple facts like this.

If you want to empower terrorists, just tell them that none of us are armed.
 
OhioArcher said:
...but with open carry. LOL! What would happen if half the student population had an "open carry day"? Not enough resources to escort everyone. And not enough hospital space for the other half to seek "safe space therapy".

It is good to have the ability to keep firearms in our vehicles now. Some places stated employees vehicles could be searched if the employer wished. BS! There is a company across from us with no-gun signs on the parking lot fence. You can tell the employees who carry...they park on the street.
Click to expand...

My opinion of this is still very low. Having a gun in the car is an improvement, but not a real solution.

If one were to have to get it quickly, would you be able to?

And if you did, would you be targeted by the police who see's a guy with a gun, rather than a guy defending his self and/or others? That's a HUGE problem now because of the conditioning the public at large has undergone the last 25 years or so.

I'm not blaming the police for that, but they're trained when they get an active shooter call to respond in force. When they arrive on scene, that's what they're looking for. A person with a gun.

Don't be that person.

They even issued an active shooter call in the latest terrorist attack that happened in Ohio despite a vehicle and knife being used and the POS didn't even have a gun to my knowledge.

And if a company told me they were going to search my car, I'd tell them in no uncertain terms they can go f themselves. And when/if they fired me, I'd sue the dog piss out of them for wrongful termination.
 
John A. said:
My opinion of this is still very low. Having a gun in the car is an improvement, but not a real solution.

If one were to have to get it quickly, would you be able to?

And if you did, would you be targeted by the police who see's a guy with a gun, rather than a guy defending his self and/or others? That's a HUGE problem now because of the conditioning the public at large has undergone the last 25 years or so.

I'm not blaming the police for that, but they're trained when they get an active shooter call to respond in force. When they arrive on scene, that's what they're looking for. A person with a gun.

Don't be that person.

They even issued an active shooter call in the latest terrorist attack that happened in Ohio despite a vehicle and knife being used and the POS didn't even have a gun to my knowledge.

And if a company told me they were going to search my car, I'd tell them in no uncertain terms they can go f themselves. And when/if they fired me, I'd sue the dog piss out of them for wrongful termination.
Click to expand...

I know what you're saying but we take small steps in OH. This is actually a big one.

Yes, gun in the car is not the same as gun in your pocket. I currently work where they don't care if you carry...most of us do. I'm changing jobs to an employer would bans employees from carrying. Not sure how I'll deal with that but it is something I need to do. Do you ignore the companies policies? If so, every day you will be thinking about that instead of thinking about what you're supposed to be doing. "Do these jeans make my gun look big?". "Can so-and-so tell if I'm carrying today?".

The OSU "active shooter" call went out because there is no "active knifer" alert for the campus. Yes, he had no gun but it did get the kids and faculty notified of a violent situation immediately. It is the damned media that jumps all over this crap without verifying anything. The officer actually had the attacker down and dead within a minute of it starting. The rest went on for a while. Actually, it is still ongoing as some of the Libtards are including the attacker in the list of people killed by police and want "justice" for his death.

As for your last statement, OH is an "at-will" employment state. Meaning you or they can terminate employment at any time for any reason. You can't sue them unless you can prove that they violated employment laws, etc. If you get hired and sign a acknowledgement/consent form you don't have a case. This part of the law change allowing firearms to locked in cars is a great move forward. It removes the criminal label from those of us that may have been doing it anyway. However, there is always something that will bugger up the works. Time will tell.
 
OhioArcher said:
The OSU "active shooter" call went out because there is no "active knifer" alert for the campus.

As for your last statement, OH is an "at-will" employment state.
Click to expand...

And no active knifer alert is a problem.

Why does it always have to be gun? active shooter?

Demonization. Further degradation of public perception.

As for Ohio being an at-will employment state, I don't know anything about that. But if I were fired for a reason here, it better be related to job performance and not just because I refused to sign my rights away.
 
At-will employment is a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it may suck if you get canned but the places I've worked at you really need to give them a valid reason to fire you. But it is a tool that can be used if needed.

And no active knifer alert is a problem.

Why does it always have to be gun? active shooter?

Demonization. Further degradation of public perception.
Click to expand...

All current LEO training encompasses a shooter scenario vs any other type of threat. It seems to be the most prevalent form of public terror right now and one that everyone is focused on. At least in the schools it is probably perceived to be the best and fastest way to get a message across regardless of the actual type of attack. While the actions of the students and teachers probably would be the same in a stabber vs shooter incident it is probably best not to confuse them about what to do in the event of such attacks.

My problem is with the media hyping the "shooter" scenario without actually doing any investigation. I believe it is wrong for them to publish "active shooter" broadcasts when there is no shooter. To me it is the same thing as yelling "Fire!" in a crowded room when there is none. The same panic ensues. It is time to hold the media accountable for their erroneous reports. Unfortunately, the media has changed from fact-driven reporting to reporting anything and making excuses/corrections later. The power of the 1st Amendment must not be trampled upon because of facts...bullsh*t. The public feeds on the garbage the current media vomits on us. Change the media, change the public's opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top