Skip to main content
Report this ad

One Ohio newspaper says 'it's not broke don't fix it' of Ohio's gun laws

The Newark Advocate ran an opinion piece Sunday entitled, "Stop tinkering with concealed-carry law."

In it, they correctly noted that "Ohio's adoption of a concealed-carry law in 2004 created quite a stir over what's turned out to be largely unfounded concerns. There haven't been shootouts in the streets or on freeways. Workplace violence hasn't increased..." While they're reaching a bit in saying that "many businesses and public places now feature a small no guns sign", they are correct in their assessment that such signs would not "stop a robber or someone aiming to create problems."

So why, after admitting the past rhetoric has been wrong, are they embracing the new lies about further reform?

But some state lawmakers...want to change concealed carry by tossing out rules for how guns must be carried in vehicles and allowing permit holders to carry guns into businesses with Class D liquor permits, including grocery stores, restaurants and bars.

Both are profoundly poor ideas...

Why are they profoundly poor ideas? Why is a concealed handgun license (CHL) holder a threat if his handgun in in his pocket instead of in a holster? Does it even make sense that a woman can legally keep a gun in her purse in the car, but only if the purse is in plain sight? Does it really matter if a CHL holder is in a restaurant that serves alcohol if he or she isn't drinking?

There's also a touch of misinformation in that grocery stores were already removed from the prohibited list. Even if they have a class D liquor permit and are conducting a wine tasting, a CHL holder can legally be in the store as long as he or she does not drink. The proposed change to Ohio law would make that exact same exemption for other businesses. How is that a problem? Are people shooting up grocery stores right now? Do they shoot up restaurants in the 40+ other states that currently allow restaurant carry, including every single state surrounding Ohio?

I'd argue that it is more of a problem to require a CHL holder to leave their firearm in their car where it is vulnerable to theft, also rendering the person defenseless to and from their car. Unlike the scenarios above, being mugged or having your car broken into are real and present dangers.

The Newark Advocate urges us to "stop tinkering with a law that's working." I'd rather we stop imposing restrictions that have zero effect on violence and only serve to disarm and entrap gun owners. Just like the other dire warnings whenever reform was considered, when these changes pass in Ohio the wide-eyed fears will not come true and everyone will wonder what the fuss was all about.

Second Amendment March contribute button


  • Adam 5 years ago

    Daniel, I agree with the amendment (obviously, I'm on your mailing list) but am confused about the part about removing the holster requirement. I think holsters add a great deal of safety while still allowing easy access for defensive purposes. If people begin carrying unholstered in their pockets I fear this would increase the risk of an accidental discharge which would give "ammo" to the anti-carry folks. Am I misinterpreting this?

  • Dancinphule 5 years ago

    This bill really strikes home with me.

    Just this last Saturday night, in accordance with the law, I left my firearm in my car before going into a nightclub in downtown cleveland. As a rule, I don't drink alcohol because it's expensive and bad for my health.

    When I returned to my car, there was a man in it, taking my things.

    He pulled my gun and threatened to shoot me with it.

    If I could have kept my gun on me in the bar, there wouldn't be another gun on the streets for the police and people to fear. Also I would not have been unarmed when returning to my car while it was being broken into.

    If that man had been more desperate, violent, on drugs, or any number of other variables, I could have been shot.

    From this recent firsthand experience, I'd say the CCW laws need revised.

  • Bob Leny 5 years ago

    It is no more dangerous to carry a gun around in a purse, than it is to carry a gun in a purse that is under the seat of a car. I personally wouldn't want my gun in a purse (lol), much less in a purse and under my seat...

    A purse is not usually a good place to put a gun, and if you are carrying in a purse, you should probably have the purse in plain sight for, if nothing else, easy access, but we do not need to make it a law.

    Education is more powerful than ANY law. If we show people that carrying a gun in a purse is a bad idea and that a proper holster that covers the trigger guard is a good idea, then people will start using a proper holster.

    Education makes people safe, not laws. Keep in mind, though, that when I say that, there are some laws that coincide with keeping people safe, but it is not the law that keeps people safe. I don't wear a seatbelt because the law tells me to, I wear it to improve my chances of walking away from a car accident.

  • Lance 5 years ago

    Here in Colorado we have had shall issue CCW for about 7 years, and ours is MUCH more liberal than Ohio. There is no permit required to carry loaded & concealed in your vehicle, permit holders you can carry in banks, bars, restaurants and liquor stores. No blood running in the streets here. Even if there were, I doubt it would be caused by those willing to go through training and meet with Law enforcement to be fingerprinted and background checked. Let the permit holders carry anywhere, you will see no increase in crime... why would you?

Report this ad