User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/2/2014 10:48:10 PM EDT
Update Dec 19th:
HE SIGNED IT!!!! 
http://www.governor.ohio.gov/Portals/0/12.19.14%20Kasich%20Signs%2040%20Bills.pdf Ohio HTF ARFCOM sprang into action to get this done at the last minute of the legislative session!!!! WE DID IT!!! CONGRATS EVERYONE!    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact Info for Gov Kasich: Governor John Kasich Riffe Center, 30th Floor 77 South High Street Columbus, OH 43215-6117 Phone: (614) 466-3555 http://www.governor.ohio.gov/Contact/ContacttheGovernor.aspx ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- UPDATE Dec 10th: Victory!!! The House concurred, and Sub HB 234 (more than just suppressors, but an amalgamation of pro-gun reforms) has passed the legislature 69-16, and is off to the governor!
Great job to OH ARFCOMers for getting involved to help get it done in such short time!!! ...let's thank our OH Sens/Reps, and let's let Kasich know there are people who want him to sign this bill!!! The yeas/nays from Senate passage are below, and I'll post up the yeas/nays from the House passage today as soon as I find out! 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMPORTANT: ONE LAST THING NEEDS TO HAPPEN TO GET THE AMENDED BILL TO KASICH ..Since the bill has changed since it first passed the house, the bill will need to be approved by a concurrence vote of the full OH House! Time is running out, I looked at the House session calendar and the last day is the 18th! We should contact our OH House critter (Lookup your Rep here by zip code: http://www.ohiohouse.gov/) - Ask them to bring Sub HB 234 (sponsored by Grossman, Becker) to a full concurrence vote before the end of the session!!!!! Important you mention this is the bill about suppressors and other pro-gun reforms, as originally sponsored by Grossman, Becker - I'm just saying this so as to avoid confusion w/ another bill in the OH House numbered "SB 234" (which is the wrong bill to refer them to)...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- UPDATE Dec 9th:
Sub HB 234 was amended to include an amalgamation of good things from other pro-gun bills. The amended bill passed the full Senate today, 24 to 6! Votes Yeas: Bacon Balderson Burke Cafaro Coley Eklund Gardner Gentile Hite Hughes Jones Jordan Kearney LaRose Lehner Obhof Oelslager Patton Peterson Schaffer Seitz Uecker Widener Faber Nays: Brown, Sawyer, Schiavoni, Skindell, Tavares, and Turner ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORIGINAL POST: ...Folks, ...the good news, looks like senators are looking to pass some of these, ..but, time is running out because all bills die at the end of this session (likely this month)... ...So, now's a good time to contact your OH Senate critters, and especially the chairman, Sen. Bill Coley. 
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/only-handful-dates-left-republican-led-senate-still-plotting-future-pro-gun-rights-bills In his hearing announcement last week, Chairman Coley indicated that possible amendments and votes are expected on the Rep. Cheryl Grossman's (R-Grove City) HB 234 and Sen. Joe Uecker's (R-Loveland) SB 338 in Wednesday's committee hearing.
However, Sen. Joe Uecker told Gongwer that the measures could end up in any House-passed bill that lawmakers think they can fold them into without violating the single subject rule. Rep. Becker said another potential amendment would essentially incorporate his proposal (HB 191) to delete a provision in state law defining a semi-automatic weapon as an automatic weapon if it can fire more than 31 cartridges without reloading. The bill has received just one hearing in the House Transportation, Public Safety & Homeland Security Committee since being introduced in June 2013. Rep. Grossman said an additional proposed amendment would pertain to the attorney general's ability to sign-off on suppressor applications. Sen. Uecker, meanwhile, said he still intends to offer an amendment to his proposed bill that would allow active duty military members below age 21 to obtain a concealed carry permit in Ohio. - |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2014 7:57:12 AM EDT
[#1]
Thanks for posting this. Sometime in the future I'd like to see our licenses change from CHL to CCW or CWL status.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2014 2:00:12 PM EDT
[#2]
Guys, we need to hit this hard RIGHT NOW. Call or write your State Senator!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2014 6:06:40 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks for posting this. Sometime in the future I'd like to see our licenses change from CHL to CCW or CWL status. +1. That's the biggest change I look forward to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2014 8:40:52 PM EDT
[#4]
Local news-talk radio station said this morning early that hunt with suppressor thing stirring
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2014 10:25:50 PM EDT
[#5]
I wish someone would introduce a "shall sign" for all NFA stuff like KY passed this year......
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/3/2014 10:44:21 PM EDT
[#6]
...just checked the senate calendar, ..both HB 234 and SB 338 were scheduled for hearings today (with possible vote)!. ...haven't heard yet what transpired..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2014 7:27:38 AM EDT
[#7]
Any news on this? BFA has nothing....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2014 10:32:53 AM EDT
[#8]
Did the Stand your proposal from awhile back get canned?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2014 2:07:08 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did the Stand your proposal from awhile back get canned? The duty to retreat law is not expected to be voted on by the senate- per Buckeye Firearms LINK |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2014 10:04:32 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did the Stand your proposal from awhile back get canned? ...I think you mean HB 203... I've noticed that there has been some reservation about this bill, in the way it could eliminate lawful firearm ownership "eligibility" for persons who've convicted of certain non-violent crimes, amonst the pro-gun community (from what I've seen on some pro-gun forums), ..so i'm wondering if the calculus at this point would be to let it die, and perhaps re-introduce a new one in the next session, ..with language that eases the concerns... ...now, as for the other bills (SB 338, HB 234, and even HB 191), ..I don't think these are really even contested in Columbus, ...so I think we should press to get at least one of these passed before the session ends, ..especially the suppressor bill, HB 234... I say, let's light some fires (figuratively speaking of course  ) under the senate to get on these!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/4/2014 11:42:05 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
...I think you mean HB 203... I've noticed that there has been some reservation about this bill, in the way it could eliminate lawful firearm ownership "eligibility" for persons who've convicted of certain non-violent crimes, amonst the pro-gun community (from what I've seen on some pro-gun forums), ..so i'm wondering if the calculus at this point would be to let it die, and perhaps re-introduce a new one in the next session, ..with language that eases the concerns... ...now, as for the other bills (SB 338, HB 234, and even HB 191), ..I don't think these are really even contested in Columbus, ...so I think we should press to get at least one of these passed before the session ends, ..especially the suppressor bill, HB 234... I say, let's light some fires (figuratively speaking of course ) under the senate to get on these!!!
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Did the Stand your proposal from awhile back get canned? ...I think you mean HB 203... I've noticed that there has been some reservation about this bill, in the way it could eliminate lawful firearm ownership "eligibility" for persons who've convicted of certain non-violent crimes, amonst the pro-gun community (from what I've seen on some pro-gun forums), ..so i'm wondering if the calculus at this point would be to let it die, and perhaps re-introduce a new one in the next session, ..with language that eases the concerns... ...now, as for the other bills (SB 338, HB 234, and even HB 191), ..I don't think these are really even contested in Columbus, ...so I think we should press to get at least one of these passed before the session ends, ..especially the suppressor bill, HB 234... I say, let's light some fires (figuratively speaking of course ) under the senate to get on these!!!
The article I read said they were going to take one of these SB338, then take HB234 and HB191 and fold them into SB338 as amendments. That way, all the hearings and other BS get bypassed. It would have to go back to the House for concurrence which is a slam dunk. This should all happen next week. Before Dec 10. HB203 is probably dead and it's probably a good thing although it had many good things in it. Aligning OH with the Fed was not a good idea. The real crux was that people who had their rights restored under OH law would not be restored under federal law thereby making them instant felons. And it had to do with lining up definition for domestic violence etc. In other words in OH the definition of domestic violence was one thing and federally it is another. OH for instance wouldn't consider a college room mate you got in a drunken head slapping contest in 25 years ago DV. But under federal law, the way it's defined you would be guilty of DV. Stuff like that. While none of that stuff will probably ever affect me, I don't really want the Fed anymore involved in OH than they are already. If SB338, HB234 and HB191 get signed into law however they have to do it. I think it would be a huge leap ahead for gun rights in OH. I'm tired of getting made fun of for the 31 round BS. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2014 3:25:44 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If SB338, HB234 and HB191 get signed into law however they have to do it. I think it would be a huge leap ahead for gun rights in OH. I'm tired of getting made fun of for the 31 round BS. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Did the Stand your proposal from awhile back get canned? ...I think you mean HB 203... I've noticed that there has been some reservation about this bill, in the way it could eliminate lawful firearm ownership "eligibility" for persons who've convicted of certain non-violent crimes, amonst the pro-gun community (from what I've seen on some pro-gun forums), ..so i'm wondering if the calculus at this point would be to let it die, and perhaps re-introduce a new one in the next session, ..with language that eases the concerns... ...now, as for the other bills (SB 338, HB 234, and even HB 191), ..I don't think these are really even contested in Columbus, ...so I think we should press to get at least one of these passed before the session ends, ..especially the suppressor bill, HB 234... I say, let's light some fires (figuratively speaking of course ) under the senate to get on these!!!If SB338, HB234 and HB191 get signed into law however they have to do it. I think it would be a huge leap ahead for gun rights in OH. I'm tired of getting made fun of for the 31 round BS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2014 3:08:52 PM EDT
[#13]
The really meaningful legislation that would have been beneficial will not be passed. While HB203 was a flawed bill, the stand your ground portion should have been taken by itself and passed. I have a hard time getting excited over suppressors! For those who want them, I'm glad it will pass for you but I've never had a need for one. While I hope I am never involved in a self defense shooting, having stand your ground would be a lot more important than a suppressor on my gun.
When it comes down to it, the Republicans are just playing games with us and doing just enough to fool us into voting for them in the next election. As I posted on BFA, the Republicans push off meaningful legislation till the lame duck session and then play games while accomplishing little. They start legislation and it sits for two years languishing because they always have something more important to get done and then they throw us a bone in the lame duck session. I'm really getting tired of it! With the Republicans controlling all of state government I expect a lot more from a group of people who claim they are 2nd Amendment supporters! I would not expect us to be ranked 41st in best states for conceal carry if the Republicans were such great 2nd Amendment supporters! I also would not expect them to be too busy over a two year period that they could not pass real meaningful pro-2nd Amendment legislation like Stand Your Ground. disgusted! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2014 6:39:23 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The 31 round rule really sucks for us with belt fed guns. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did the Stand your proposal from awhile back get canned? ...I think you mean HB 203... I've noticed that there has been some reservation about this bill, in the way it could eliminate lawful firearm ownership "eligibility" for persons who've convicted of certain non-violent crimes, amonst the pro-gun community (from what I've seen on some pro-gun forums), ..so i'm wondering if the calculus at this point would be to let it die, and perhaps re-introduce a new one in the next session, ..with language that eases the concerns... ...now, as for the other bills (SB 338, HB 234, and even HB 191), ..I don't think these are really even contested in Columbus, ...so I think we should press to get at least one of these passed before the session ends, ..especially the suppressor bill, HB 234... I say, let's light some fires (figuratively speaking of course ) under the senate to get on these!!!
If SB338, HB234 and HB191 get signed into law however they have to do it. I think it would be a huge leap ahead for gun rights in OH. I'm tired of getting made fun of for the 31 round BS. You need to practice some Irish Democracy.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2014 9:14:07 PM EDT
[#15]
SB338 (CC reforms), SB234 (suppressors) - these are scheduled for yet another committee hearing tomorrow!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2014 10:39:35 PM EDT
[#16]
Somebody forward on the FL just started suppressor hunting last week, and links to other states' laws allowing suppressors for hunting
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 7:46:22 AM EDT
[#17]
Suppressed hunting? I, for one, want to know when the bozos are out there shooting and where they are. They aren't all bozos, but there are way too many of them!
-- Chuck |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 8:00:36 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Suppressed hunting? I, for one, want to know when the bozos are out there shooting and where they are. They aren't all bozos, but there are way too many of them! -- Chuck Those who take the time to do the paperwork to get a can are likely to be far more safe than bubba who buys a shotgun from Wal-Mart. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 9:26:16 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Suppressed hunting? I, for one, want to know when the bozos are out there shooting and where they are. They aren't all bozos, but there are way too many of them! -- Chuck Are you serious?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 9:42:33 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Suppressed hunting? I, for one, want to know when the bozos are out there shooting and where they are. They aren't all bozos, but there are way too many of them! -- Chuck You'd be glad to know, then, that most suppressed hunting rounds will still be loud, just not deafening to the shooter. Although, I want to take out some squirrels and that would be pretty quiet with the suppressed 22! |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 12:10:38 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Suppressed hunting? I, for one, want to know when the bozos are out there shooting and where they are. They aren't all bozos, but there are way too many of them! -- Chuck You know how I know you've never shot a suppressed firearm? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 1:06:46 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You know how I know you've never shot a suppressed firearm? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Suppressed hunting? I, for one, want to know when the bozos are out there shooting and where they are. They aren't all bozos, but there are way too many of them! -- Chuck You know how I know you've never shot a suppressed firearm? I was thinking the same thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 3:12:02 PM EDT
[#23]
HB 234 Passed committee headed to Senate today
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/landmark-firearms-legislation-passed-out-committee-expected-pass-ohio-senate-later-today |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 3:12:25 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You know how I know you've never shot a suppressed firearm? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Suppressed hunting? I, for one, want to know when the bozos are out there shooting and where they are. They aren't all bozos, but there are way too many of them! -- Chuck You know how I know you've never shot a suppressed firearm? that said.. LOOKS LIKE ITS PASSING!!!! http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/landmark-firearms-legislation-passed-out-committee-expected-pass-ohio-senate-later-today |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 3:41:45 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol... that said.. LOOKS LIKE ITS PASSING!!!! http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/landmark-firearms-legislation-passed-out-committee-expected-pass-ohio-senate-later-today Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Suppressed hunting? I, for one, want to know when the bozos are out there shooting and where they are. They aren't all bozos, but there are way too many of them! -- Chuck You know how I know you've never shot a suppressed firearm? that said.. LOOKS LIKE ITS PASSING!!!! http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/landmark-firearms-legislation-passed-out-committee-expected-pass-ohio-senate-later-today
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 4:32:53 PM EDT
[#26]
I sure wish they would pass something that gets rid of the 31 rounds is a MG rule. It makes us look like a bunch of rubes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 4:38:48 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I sure wish they would pass something that gets rid of the 31 rounds is a MG rule. It makes us look like a bunch of rubes. This does get rid of this by correctly defining an automatic weapon |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 4:58:31 PM EDT
[#28]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 5:24:09 PM EDT
[#29]
And it sounds like it passed the Senate. I didn't hear if it added all the amendments or not though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 5:48:24 PM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 5:57:00 PM EDT
[#31]
I'm new to Ohio so please forgive me for this question....
Is there any way that Kasich will not sign this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 6:20:09 PM EDT
[#32]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 6:21:10 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm new to Ohio so please forgive me for this question.... Is there any way that Kasich will not sign this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 7:59:34 PM EDT
[#34]
If passed how soon will a CHL class be 8 hours?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 8:14:37 PM EDT
[#35]
This is Great news. Glad I have 5 suppressors inbound.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 8:19:44 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If passed how soon will a CHL class be 8 hours? I don't think that is part of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 8:28:47 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't think that is part of it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If passed how soon will a CHL class be 8 hours? I don't think that is part of it. "Under the bill, completing OPOTA (law enforcement) training will satisfy the requirements of the training to obtain a CHL, as will military training obtained with 10 years of the application. For everyone else, required training to obtain a CHL would change to eight (8) hours, which would still be above the national average." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 8:30:43 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If passed how soon will a CHL class be 8 hours? Typically 90 days after it's signed on this sort of thing IIRC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 8:37:00 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Typically 90 days after it's signed on this sort of thing IIRC. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If passed how soon will a CHL class be 8 hours? Typically 90 days after it's signed on this sort of thing IIRC. That's what I was thinking. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 8:38:42 PM EDT
[#40]
I heard one of the amendments was that eliminate the need to have all firearms NOT on your person to be locked up. That to me is anti gun. With that said if you have children in the house that get into everything and nothing is sacred, then maybe those should be locked, but not in a law. IMHO.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 8:48:37 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I heard one of the amendments was that eliminate the need to have all firearms NOT on your person to be locked up. That to me is anti gun. With that said if you have children in the house that get into everything and nothing is sacred, then maybe those should be locked, but not in a law. IMHO. Here is the bill, "as passed by the senate": http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=130_HB_234 I searched for "lock" and "secure" and couldn't find anything what other words should be searched- my vocabulary is not strong.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 8:54:48 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Under the bill, completing OPOTA (law enforcement) training will satisfy the requirements of the training to obtain a CHL, as will military training obtained with 10 years of the application. For everyone else, required training to obtain a CHL would change to eight (8) hours, which would still be above the national average." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If passed how soon will a CHL class be 8 hours? I don't think that is part of it. "Under the bill, completing OPOTA (law enforcement) training will satisfy the requirements of the training to obtain a CHL, as will military training obtained with 10 years of the application. For everyone else, required training to obtain a CHL would change to eight (8) hours, which would still be above the national average." Oh gotcha. I thought that bill was nixed. Isn't this something that will reduce the reciprocity with other states, or is that some other aspect of the multitude of bills from the last year or so? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 9:04:04 PM EDT
[#43]
Keep in mind guys that several bills were combined into HB 234.
Btw, Sec. 311.43 appears to lay out shall issue for NFA items if I read it correctly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 10:00:52 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Keep in mind guys that several bills were combined into HB 234. Btw, Sec. 311.43 appears to lay out shall issue for NFA items if I read it correctly. That looks like to me like "shall issue" |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 10:05:50 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Keep in mind guys that several bills were combined into HB 234. Btw, Sec. 311.43 appears to lay out shall issue for NFA items if I read it correctly. I got that also. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 10:09:29 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This does get rid of this by correctly defining an automatic weapon Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I sure wish they would pass something that gets rid of the 31 rounds is a MG rule. It makes us look like a bunch of rubes. This does get rid of this by correctly defining an automatic weapon (E) "Automatic firearm" means any firearm designed or specially adapted to fire a succession of cartridges with a single function of the trigger. "Automatic firearm" also means any semi-automatic firearm designed or specially adapted to fire more than thirty-one cartridges without reloading, other than a firearm chambering only .22 caliber short, long, or long-rifle cartridges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 10:31:57 PM EDT
[#47]
Here's an interesting change that slipped by most. Seems the classroom portion of ccw class can now be online.
3)(a) Except as otherwise provided in this division, the training specified in division (G)(1)(a) of this section shall be provided to the person receiving the training in person by an instructor. If the training specified in division (G)(1)(a) of this section is provided by a course, class, or program described in division (B)(3)(a) of this section, or it is provided by a course, class, or program described in division (B)(3)(b), (c), or (e) of this section and the instructor is a qualified instructor certified by a national gun advocacy organization, the training so specified, other than the training that requires the person receiving the training to demonstrate handling abilities, may be provided online or as a combination of in-person and online training, as long as the online training includes an interactive component that regularly engages the person. (b) Except as otherwise provided in this division, the written section of the competency examination specified in division (G)(2)(a) of this section shall be administered to the person taking the competency examination in person by an instructor. If the training specified in division (G)(1)(a) of this section is provided to the person receiving the training by a course, class, or program described in division (B)(3)(a) of this section, or it is provided by a course, class, or program described in division (B)(3)(b), (c), or (e) of this section and the instructor is a qualified instructor certified by a national gun advocacy organization, the written section of the competency examination specified in division (G)(2)(a) of this section may be administered online, as long as the online training includes an interactive component that regularly engages the person. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 11:03:33 PM EDT
[#48]
Folks,
As you now know Sub H.B. 234 was modified to include many of the good things from other pro-gun bills! It not only passed committee, but passed senate 24 to 6!
Thought you might like to see how your senator voted today on final passage
From the Senate Journal: Yeas: Bacon Balderson Burke Cafaro Coley Eklund Gardner Gentile Hite Hughes Jones Jordan Kearney LaRose Lehner Obhof Oelslager Patton Peterson Schaffer Seitz Uecker Widener Faber Nays: Brown, Sawyer, Schiavoni, Skindell, Tavares, and Turner |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 11:05:06 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
[div style='font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; white-space: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 254, 238);'][div style='margin-left: 40px;']Sec. 311.43. (A) As used in this section:That looks like to me like "shall issue" Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Keep in mind guys that several bills were combined into HB 234. Btw, Sec. 311.43 appears to lay out shall issue for NFA items if I read it correctly. [div style='font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; white-space: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 254, 238);'][div style='margin-left: 40px;']Sec. 311.43. (A) As used in this section:That looks like to me like "shall issue" Did they seriously just say my anti gun sheriff has to sign off on form 4's now!!?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2014 11:14:49 PM EDT
[#50]
...folks, I tried to quickly compile a bulleted list of the amended bills contents - it covers a lot, so I may have missed something:
Sub HB 234 (as passed today by the Senate) - An amalgamation of pro-gun reforms:
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
