The House Criminal Justice Committee, chaired by Rep. John White (R-38), will hold a fourth hearing on HB264 (Castle Doctrine), on Thursday, May 1 at 9:30 a.m. in Statehouse Room 121.

The chairman has indicated that a substitute bill may be introduced.

The Senate's version of Castle Doctrine (SB184) passed the Senate earlier this month with unanimous support.

Meanwhile in the Senate, Ohio's "Firearms Modernization" (Concealed Carry Fix-it) bill (SB318), has been added to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Criminal Justice's agenda for Wednesday, April 30 at 10:00 a.m. in the Senate Building's North Hearing Room.

This will be the second formal hearing of the bill by this committee, and is being held for the purpose of considering opponent testimony.

For more information on this legislation, click here.

Thank you for responding to our call to use our Write to Legislators website feature to contact your legislators. Please encourage your pro-self-defense friends and family to do the same.

The following commentary was written in response to a New York Times article entitled "Guns on Campus: Could They Prevent a Repeat?" by David Codrea. Republished with permission.

Interesting take, Mr. Codrea.

I have worked on college and university campuses most of my adult life - first as a student, now as a professor. I have grown quite accustomed to the idea of citizen concealed carry. I know that such policies (now the norm in 48 states) do not increase crime; in contrast, data suggests these allowances deter all but the most brazen (or stupid) criminals. Most importantly, I also realize that criminals can and will carry weapons anywhere they wish, despite the law.

Concealed carry is analogous to driving down the highway. I know that at any moment, any of the thousands of drivers could swerve and kill me head-on. Each one has the potential to kill me, every day. But day after year after decade, they do not. Why not? They are decent people, and well-intentioned, just like you and me. Millions make the "right" choices every day, all their lives. Carrying a firearm is no different.

By L. Dietle

There has been little Second Amendment jurisprudence. In this vacuum, myths were cooked up and circulated to dilute the Amendment's original meaning. In the March 18, 2008 D.C. vs. Heller oral argument at the Supreme Court, these myths were thoroughly debunked by the Supreme Court Justices themselves. If honest, they will overturn D.C.'s functional firearms ban. They should also apply the Second Amendment to the States (incorporation) and establish strict judicial scrutiny.

The Second Amendment was considered a fundamental individual right by those who wrote and ratified the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. A majority of Americans still considers it so today. It would take 3/4ths of the States to amend the Second Amendment out of the Constitution, but that many States filed an Amicus Brief to overturn the D.C. functional firearms ban. A majority of Congress did the same (to see all briefs, click here). The Second Amendment is here to stay.