Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Page Hometown » Ohio
Posted: 5/28/2003 9:21:23 AM EDT
www.ohioccw.org/article1144.html

A Senate committee that has heard extensive testimony on a measure (HB 12) that would specifically permit gun owners to carry their weapons in a concealed fashion expects to have a substitute bill prepared for consideration next week and could call for a vote the following week, its chairman said Tuesday.

Senator Steve Austria (R-Beavercreek), chair of the Senate Judiciary on Criminal Justice Committee, said he the committee will be addressing three key issues – property owners’ ability to restrict guns; carrying weapons in vehicles and affirmative defense – in the new version of the bill.

He said, however, that the committee appears to be split on how to handle those issues. Negotiations, the senator said after the panel’s meeting on Tuesday, are ongoing with Sponsor Rep. Jim Aslanides (R-Coshocton), House leaders and officials from Governor Bob Taft’s office.

His comments came after a relatively brief meeting at which witnesses called for a wide range of changes in the bill – from making technical changes to enacting a more wide-open Vermont-style weapons law. Because the tide of witnesses appears to be slowing, Chairman Austria canceled the panel’s meeting scheduled for Wednesday.

Dennis Walker, president of the Ohio Constitution Defense Council, urged the panel Tuesday to drop requirements regarding the disclosure of social security numbers; maintain the local government pre-emption clause and preserve the affirmative defense language in the bill.

Brenda and Kenneth Kill also testified as interested parties. Ms. Kill, while supporting a separate concealed weapons measure that would implement the Vermont plan, said that state has not seen the development of a "Wild West" environment that gun control advocates predicted. The wheelchair-bound witness added that carrying a weapon would give her confidence that she could protect herself from attack. "There’s no way I could defend myself from a thug," she said.

Mr. Kill argued that any effort the state makes to restrict gun owners right to carry their weapons infringes on constitutional rights. "I know it’s illegal now (to carry a concealed weapon), but I don’t care," he said. "I don’t need your permission."

Mr. Kill urged lawmakers to brush up on their knowledge of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. "Politicians seem to ignore the plain, simple statements of the founders," he said. If lawmakers want to address issues associated with weapons, he said they should do so by changing the constitution, not the law.

Senator Teresa Fedor (D-Toledo) challenged the witness to explain why it is so crucial that Ohioans have the ability to carry concealed weapons when they already have the ability to carry weapons in plain view. Mr. Kill said anyone carrying a plain sight weapon would be arrested for inducing panic.

Senator Fedor also expressed frustration with some groups publishing information on the Internet criticizing lawmakers’ understanding of the issues involved in the debate. "It’s become offensive when we are thought upon as not being smart enough to understand," she said.

As a parting shot, Mr. Kill also offered criticism of the security level at the Statehouse, where visitors now can enter the building through just a handful of doors that are constantly monitored by of the State Highway Patrol officers. “By the way, the security’s terrible in this building,” he said. "I could have brought a cannon in here."

---------------

I bolded Sen. Teresa Foder's (D - Toledo) (of course) comments so we could see exactly why she's not smart enough to understand....
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 9:34:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 12:57:10 PM EDT
They didn't ask me to testify. I would love to testify. You see, then I could have confirmed for the Senator as an expert witness that anyone I saw carrying openly in a public place or venue where another person was disturbed or alarmed by the site of the firearm would be arrested for disorderly conduct or inducing panic, whichever was appropriate to the circumstances. I don't understand how she feels insulted having these concepts explained to her. I would certainly not presume politicians to understand the subtlties of every law or circumstance.
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 1:02:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By shotar:
You see, then I could have confirmed for the Senator as an expert witness that anyone I saw carrying openly in a public place or venue where another person was disturbed or alarmed by the site of the firearm would be arrested for disorderly conduct or inducing panic, whichever was appropriate to the circumstances.



Boy! As much as I love ya' my brother, I don't quite know how to respond to this admission.

Link Posted: 5/28/2003 4:35:31 PM EDT
I understand the sentiment, but in reality it would be no different than walking through the mall with an Axe. If someone is scared or disturbed by it, its disorderly conduct. All things in their proper places.
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 6:28:12 PM EDT
Does this mean that if I am disturbed or alarmed by, lets say... conjoined twins, that they could be arrested for disturbing the peace for simply appearing in public with all their appalling, biological 'diversity'?
Link Posted: 5/28/2003 9:56:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/28/2003 9:57:53 PM EDT by BigJ491]

Mr. Kill said anyone carrying a plain sight weapon would be arrested for inducing panic.



Well, no shit! I love how these liberal-ass politicians have NO clue what is going on in the real world. Ohioans can "carry in plain view." I've yet to see anyone get away w/ this.


I would certainly not presume politicians to understand the subtlties of every law or circumstance.
Subtlties? There's nothing subtle about how Ohio handles guns in it's state. You can transport it, within the confines of the law, but under NO circumstances can a private citizen carry openly or concealed. I don't carry what the law says, you will be arrested and charged w/ something. Good luck trying to use their shittyass "Affirmative Defense" Law. This state is so FUBAR. I really hope we get what Vermont has!
Link Posted: 5/29/2003 7:04:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By BenDover:
Does this mean that if I am disturbed or alarmed by, lets say... conjoined twins, that they could be arrested for disturbing the peace for simply appearing in public with all their appalling, biological 'diversity'?



Not actually, you see the disturbing or alarming thing actually would have to be something that the perpetrator would have control over. I would venture that the twins could not choose to unconjoin. One could however choose not to yell fire in a crowded theater, not to wave a sword around in the mall, and not to carry a gun in a circumstance that is reasonably likely to cause alarm to others. That leaves concealed as the most practical way to carry, and unfortunately until the law is changed or the supreme court rules, most folks are stuck with no legal option most of the time. This is why you don't see arrests for open carry at Gun shows or shooting ranges. These are places that one would normally expect to see weapons openly carried.
Link Posted: 5/29/2003 8:52:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By shotar:
anyone I saw carrying openly in a public place or venue where another person was disturbed or alarmed by the site of the firearm would be arrested



YOU FUGGIN JBT!!!!

Just kidding Shotar.
Everyone knows MMSIG229 is the real JBT.

Scott
Link Posted: 5/30/2003 4:33:09 AM EDT
And everyone knows I'm just kidding, right?

I s'pose around here, that was probably stupid stuff to say, so to Shotar, MMSig229, MHPDBLUE and all the other LEO's here, Please accept my apology.

Scott
Link Posted: 5/30/2003 12:05:21 PM EDT
Mr. Kill--that's kinda funny.
Page Hometown » Ohio
Top Top