Ohio introduces constitutional carry bill

[rbMPSH12]

Don't know what the chances are of this passing but hopefully momentum from other states like Kansas will help.

Bill would allow Ohioans to carry concealed firearms with no permit, training | The Columbus Dispatch

 

[Bill of Rights]

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but OH is currently a state in which one may carry openly, without any sort of permit, yes?

This means they only need the permit to carry concealed.

In short, anti-gunners are arguing that gun owners should have to have a permit to wear a coat.

 

[45fan]

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but OH is currently a state in which one may carry openly, without any sort of permit, yes?

This means they only need the permit to carry concealed.

In short, anti-gunners are arguing that gun owners should have to have a permit to wear a coat.

While I understand your reasoning, and believe it to be sound, you do realize that any self respecting liberal will tear this argument apart with foul language, wild acts of violence, and threatening violence on innocents, right?

 

[cce1302]

They've introduced similar bills before. It'll probably take a few more tries, but at least they're on the right track.

 

[Bill of Rights]

While I understand your reasoning, and believe it to be sound, you do realize that any self respecting liberal will tear this argument apart with foul language, wild acts of violence, and threatening violence on innocents, right?

...and we're somehow the unbalanced crazies here, how?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but OH is currently a state in which one may carry openly, without any sort of permit, yes?

This means they only need the permit to carry concealed.

In short, anti-gunners are arguing that gun owners should have to have a permit to wear a coat.

This was at least true prior to them getting a permit. I recall the organization of open carry protests to make that exact point. Out-of-staters were told to wear an empty holster as they weren't sure if the law applied to non-residents or not. As such, I elected not to participate in person but did assist in other ways.

 

[cce1302]

This was at least true prior to them getting a permit. I recall the organization of open carry protests to make that exact point. Out-of-staters were told to wear an empty holster as they weren't sure if the law applied to non-residents or not. As such, I elected not to participate in person but did assist in other ways.

I would have probably refused to participate in an open carry protest where the organizers themselves were unsure of the law as well.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I would have probably refused to participate in an open carry protest where the organizers themselves were unsure of the law as well.

I might have. As was pointed out recently, no state has a law against wearing a holster.

 

[Kutnupe14]

So here's the question, let's say Indiana adopts Constitutional Carry. Would it then be acceptable if the state stopped printing LTCHs?

 

[chipbennett]

So here's the question, let's say Indiana adopts Constitutional Carry. Would it then be acceptable if the state stopped printing LTCHs?

No. Reciprocity is critical for some of us. Just let the LTCH be optional, for those of us who need it in order to maintain our rights in other states.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

So here's the question, let's say Indiana adopts Constitutional Carry. Would it then be acceptable if the state stopped printing LTCHs?

No. Reciprocity is critical for some of us. Just let the LTCH be optional, for those of us who need it in order to maintain our rights in other states.

Something I've thought about but haven't studied yet: In the states that have CC, does that apply to residents of the given state only? Or can "out-of-staters" carry there as well, whether the states recognize one and/or the other?

 

[chipbennett]

Something I've thought about but haven't studied yet: In the states that have CC, does that apply to residents of the given state only? Or can "out-of-staters" carry there as well, whether the states recognize one and/or the other?

Constitutional carry means there is no statutory restriction of carry for anyone lawfully able to possess a firearm. Carry is lawful unless a statute makes it unlawful.

 

[Kutnupe14]

No. Reciprocity is critical for some of us. Just let the LTCH be optional, for those of us who need it in order to maintain our rights in other states.

Would there be a cost associated with having a physical LTCH? If not, I don't see why it would be in the state's interest to address, at a cost to itself, a problem that occurs outside of its borders.

 

[shibumiseeker]

This was at least true prior to them getting a permit. I recall the organization of open carry protests to make that exact point. Out-of-staters were told to wear an empty holster as they weren't sure if the law applied to non-residents or not. As such, I elected not to participate in person but did assist in other ways.

I thought your badge allowed you to carry there?

 

[mrjarrell]

Something I've thought about but haven't studied yet: In the states that have CC, does that apply to residents of the given state only? Or can "out-of-staters" carry there as well, whether the states recognize one and/or the other?

As far as I know you can carry in these states without a LTCH. I have never seen any exception carved out for out of staters. Once you cross their border you are good to go, as far as I know.

 

[chipbennett]

Would there be a cost associated with having a physical LTCH? If not, I don't see why it would be in the state's interest to address, at a cost to itself, a problem that occurs outside of its borders.

Well, assuming the fingerprinting and background check requirements go away, and the cost is literally the administrative cost of processing the application and printing/mailing the LTCH, there would still reasonably be a cost, but significantly less than the current cost.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Well, assuming the fingerprinting and background check requirements go away, and the cost is literally the administrative cost of processing the application and printing/mailing the LTCH, there would still reasonably be a cost, but significantly less than the current cost.

If it did go away (the fingerprinting and background check), why would it be in the interest of non-constitutional carry states to honor our, meaningless (to them) physical ltch? Out of curiosity does Indiana all persons from constitutional carry states to carry here?

 

[chipbennett]

If it did go away (the fingerprinting and background check), why would it be in the interest of non-constitutional carry states to honor our, meaningless (to them) physical ltch? Out of curiosity does Indiana all persons from constitutional carry states to carry here?

If the fingerprinting or (more likely) the background check requirement needed to remain in order to maintain reciprocity, I'd be fine with that. I've already done it anyway.

Indiana honors permits from all states except for Vermont, which does not issue a permit. I would assume that means that Vermont residents do not have a legal means to carry in Indiana, unless they obtain a non-resident permit from some other state.

 

[opus1776]

As far as I know you can carry in these states without a LTCH. I have never seen any exception carved out for out of staters. Once you cross their border you are good to go, as far as I know.

And you would be VERY wrong. Permitless carry does NOT cross the border. Look at VT for example:


http://handgunlaw.us/states/vermont.pdf











======================================
"Nothing tastes as good as skinny feels" K. Moss
You can NEVER be too rich or too thin.
Life is not a journey, but a series of unplanned detours...
Perfection: is not a goal---it's a demanded expectation.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I thought your badge allowed you to carry there?

It does, but I wasn't born a cop.

I was working IT when those protests were happening.