Yesterday, The Arms Guide posted about an increase in firearms restriction due to the long gun registry that begins at the start of 2014. On the opposite side of the spectrum, Columbus station 610 WTVN reported on the Ohio legislature’s recent discussion of a bill that would modifying their concealed carry to a “constitutional carry” solution.
Presently, Ohio uses a shall-issue system, but there are a few steps applicants must complete before being deemed eligible to receive their permits. Concealed carry permit applicants must apply at their local sheriff’s office. Anyone looking to acquire their CWP (concealed weapons permit) must complete a 12 hour training course (including 10 hours of class instruction and 2 hours of handgun shooting instruction) and bring their certificate of completion to their local sheriff’s office. Applicants must also pass a background check (and pay for it), submit their fingerprints, and read the Ohio’s Concealed Carry Laws and Lisence Application handbook, and pay a fee for the permit itself ($67 for +5 year OH residents, and $91 for <5yr OH residents).
The bill, proposed by co-sponsors Ron Hood (R) and Matt Lynch (R), would open up concealed carry to anyone over 21 years old who is legally able to own firearms. This unrestricted, or constitutional, carry system is similar to the concealed carry systems currently in effect in Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, and Wyoming.
Some who oppose the constitutional carry proposal have voiced concern over removing the training requirement, while supporters have expressed that the right to conceal carry is protected under the 2nd Amendment. Where do you stand on unrestricted concealed carry?
Featured image courtesy of contributor koi88 via iStockphoto.com
chip_bennett Would those states rescind CCW reciprocity for in-state carry?
I’m talking that if you have an Ohio state issued CCW would I be illegal to carry in Kentucky. And would Kentucky actually withdraw the reciprocity based off the change because it is legal to carry in Ohio?
Most of the reciprocity rules are based off the CCW license in your possession. Just like having a driver’s license.
A 14 year old driving a tractor load of hay from farm to farm in Ohio is legal. Going from Ohio to Kentucky is illegal. Same thing.
chip_bennett Jim P. State reciprocity varies from state to state. Currently OH does not recognize an IN LTCH because there are no training requirements in IN. OH HB 203 may change that, and will at least increase the number of states OH has reciprocity with, even though it decreases the training requirements. So long as you can obtain a permit from OH, Kentucky, Missouri, and North Carolina all seem to have a law that says if your state issues a CCW permit, we will recognize it whether or not your state recognizes ours. You should be ok to carry in those states.
I don’t know what the legislation in the post proposes, exactly, but if it’s set up like Arizona’s law, it seems reasonable. Arizona is a constitutional carry state, but they also offer a license to those who want one. I believe Alaska is the same way.
Does anyone else see training requirements and being forced to pay for a background check to exercise our rights as the equivalent of a poll tax?
To get an Ohio CCW, you must take a 12 hour course, get a background check, and pay a nontrivial sum of money. Suppose you had to do this to vote. People would be yelling, RACISM! Or maybe, CLASS WARFARE! Definitely, INFRINGEMENT! But most of those people don’t have the same respect for our right to keep and bear arms as the do for our right to vote.
I definitely think everyone that carries a gun should know how to use it and get training if they don’t. But to require that training as a precondition to being permitted to carry discriminates against the poor, and is an unacceptable infringement on our natural, human rights. I don’t know if this is true, but I’ve heard that the requirements for a CCW in New Hampshire consists of going to the police station, paying $10 for a background check, and coming back to pick up the receipt (which is also the ccw) a few days later. That close to reasonable to me.
I think Arizona gets it close to right. They are a constitutional carry state that still issues carry permits for those wanting legal cover or the ability to carry in other states that require a permit for reciprocity (like Indiana). I think Alaska is like this, as well.
Getting it right would be coast to coast constitutional carry.
ZD87 chip_bennett Jim P. Wait: so do I have that backward? Is it Ohio that’s currently denying reciprocity due to other States not having the same level of certification required to obtain the CCW? I still occasionally get some state-specific details confused, going from one state’s CCW (Missouri) now to a different state (Ohio).
If that’s the case, then I have no problem with the changes to the law, provided that Ohio still actually issues a permit (for reciprocity purposes – I think Alaska does something similar, as you said?).
Assuming that reciprocity is not an issue, I have no problem with the proposed legislation. I am adamantly opposed to a demonstration of proficiency as a prerequisite to the exercise of a basic human right protected against infringement by the Constitution. Negligent firearm use by untrained people exercising their second-amendment rights is a Bogeyman unsupported by fact or statistics.