One step closer to self-defense in restaurants in Ohio

November 2, 6:39 AMCleveland Gun Rights ExaminerDaniel White

Previous Next

4 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Cleveland Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Ohioans For Concealed Carry is reporting that what some have come to call "Applebee's Carry" is one step closer to reality in Ohio as House Bill 203 will receive its first hearing this Thursday, November 5th.

Current Ohio law prohibits firearms by law abiding citizens in almost any commercial establishment that serves alcohol for consumption on premises if anyone in the facility is consuming, even if the armed citizen is not. The only current exception for most people is retail stores such as a grocery store doing a wine tasting. In that situation, a person can carry as long as they do not drink any liquor.

HB 203 would extend that exception to restaurants, again provided that the person carrying a firearm for self-defense does not drink. In the map below (courtesy of OpenCarry.org), you can see that Ohio is one of only 8 states with a total prohibition. Most states have some provision for carrying a firearm in a restaurant, often with a stipulation to not consume alcohol while doing so.

Allowing a person the right to carry their firearm with them into such a restaurant not only continues to ensure their safety while dining, but also to and from the restaurant.

Any self-defense expert will tell you that a parking lot, particularly at night, is a favorite location for many crimes. Not only muggings, but also car break-ins. A firearm left in a vehicle can be easily stolen and used in future crimes. Keeping that firearm safely with the citizen keeps them safe and keeps the gun safe.

Opponents argue that allowing guns in a place that serves alcohol will lead to drunken shootouts. Yet if you look at any of the 42 states without bans you see that this is simply not the case. It works in every state bordering Ohio and it will work here if given a chance.

This first hearing for HB 203 is sponsor testimony. If subsequent hearings are held, the second one is often proponent testimony with a third being opponent testimony.