Two BFA-supported bills heard by Senate committee; Opposition from FOP and OACP crazy as ever

On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 two pro-gun bills received hearings in the Senate Civil Justice Committee.

HB 234 (Allow Noise Suppressors While Hunting) sponsored by Representatives Cheryl Grossman (R-Grove City) received its 2nd hearing where proponent testimony was offered. Two witnesses testified in support of this legislation.

Kelly O’Reilly testified on behalf of Ohio Speech and Hearing Governmental Affairs Coalition (OSHGAC). She outlined what a suppressor does with hard numbers on the decibel reduction from observed shooting of suppressed and unsuppressed firearms. She also explained the importance of that noise reduction to reducing permanent hearing loss. The sound of gunfire can cause permanent, irreparable damage to one’s hearing. Reducing the report of gunfire reduces hearing loss.

Also testifying in favor of HB 234 was Louis Knebel, a lifelong hunter and shooter. He testified that suppressors are not commonly used in crimes and that it was not an issue for poaching. He noted that ODNR uses suppressors for hunting and control of nuisance animals, including issuing permits to land owners to control destructive animals by “any means necessary.” That includes the use of suppressors, which is still illegal under Ohio law.

O’Reilly and Knebel offered very different reasons why HB 234 should become law. Both their testimony is interesting and worth reading (download their testimony here).

No one has offered a valid reason why the changes sought in HB 234 would be harmful.

Prior to testimony on the noise suppressor legislation, a third hearing was given to SB 338 (Concealed Carry Law Reform), sponsored by Senator Joe Uecker, (R-Miami Township), and opponent testimony was heard.

John Murphy, testifying for the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association, focused his opposition to SB 338 on restoration issues. He testified that restoration in a “pardon, final discharge and sealing statutes is absolute, we know of no authority holding that the restoration language in these statutes prevail over 2923.14.” In other words he wants those who have had their record restored by pardon or other means to still not have their firearm rights, unless they go through yet another legal process. We believe that if a judge restores someone’s record, that restoration should be treated the same in all sections of law.

Next up was John Gilchrist of the Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police (OACP). Interestingly, Gilchrist spent much of his opposition testimony discussing changes to Ohio’s disorderly conduct and inducing panic laws that are not even in the bill. (Those proposed changes are in HB 203, which was not being considered by the committee at this time.) Gilchrist does not think exercising one's constitutional rights should be permitted if it causes someone else concern. He also thinks it’s important that entities be able to overrule state laws and licensing systems by banning license holders in parks or events.

Sen. Uecker pointed out that the Supreme Court has already ruled that preemption is constitutional and asked Gilchrist what other constitutional rights he thinks it’s OK to restrict and trample on because someone might be offended. Of course Gilchrist refused to answer that question, but instead babbled on about the militia and how the United State Supreme Court was wrong in Heller v District of Columbia.

Senator Bill Seitz (R-Cincinnati) correctly pointed out that this discussion was about the Ohio Constitution, which makes no mention of “militia” and the Ohio Supreme Court, which ruled on preemption. Gilchrist said he didn’t have an Ohio constitution and seemed not to care that we have one - sad testimony for someone supposedly representing police officers who have all taken an oath to uphold our laws and Constitution.

Toby Hoover of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence submitted written testimony opposing SB 338. Of the many things she took issue with, one of the most puzzling was her objection to counting military training toward meeting the training requirement to obtain a CHL. Her testimony states, “It is disrespectful to remove this when the suicide rate for veterans is alarming…” She does not explain how taking a basic pistol class will reduce the suicide rate of our veterans.

Ohio Public Radio has published a report on the hearing, entitled "Proposed Changes To Gun Law Revives Familiar Debate," which documents testimony from yet another opponent:

Another bill that tinkers with the state’s concealed-carry weapons law is in a Senate committee now. Statehouse correspondent Karen Kasler reports that two groups that have always been very involved in the issue are once again clashing over the proposed changes.

It’s no secret that law enforcement has had serious concerns about concealed-carry weapons permits. And this bill to make some changes in the law brings up some of the same old issues for police officers, deputies and troopers. Mike Weinman with the Fraternal Order of Police says the bill reintroduces the idea that Ohio will recognize the concealed-carry permits issued in other states – states that he says don’t have the same kinds of standards that Ohio does.

“Virginia is doing an online test, which doesn’t meet Ohio requirements. That just makes you sit up and take notice of what these different training standards – if any at all – are in these other states. For example, Indiana doesn’t do any type of training. So do we want someone without any training carrying guns into bars in the state of Ohio?”

But supporters of the law say reciprocity is only fair, and not really all that controversial. Jim Irvine is with the Buckeye Firearms Association.

“Different states have different standards for driver’s license, but we don’t say, ‘well, that’s tough - we’re not going to honor Indiana’s driver’s license because we don’t like that.’ We honor all drivers’ licenses. Yeah, there’s different standards, but unless there’s some indication that there’s a danger or a problem with some other states standards, why wouldn’t we accept it?”

The article also covers both groups' positions on a proposal to reduce the mandatory training for CHLs from twelve to eight hours.

The bill also lowers the amount of required training for first-time concealed carry weapons permit applicant from 12 hours to eight. Irvine says that change will actually encourage more people who are applying for concealed-carry weapons permits for the first time to get what he considers the most important hours of training – the first few hours.

“Twelve hours isn’t going to necessarily make them proficient. So the 12 hours doesn’t really solve our problem. Eight hours isn’t going to do that either. But let’s get them in, get them something, and then it’s up to the instructor to say, hey, you need this much more or that much more before I sign you off. And a lot of instructors don’t sign people off at the end of 12 hours – and you shouldn’t, if they’re not ready to carry a firearm yet, if they’re not ready to meet the standard.”

But Weinman with the FOP says eight hours isn’t enough – and 12 hours probably isn’t either, especially when the requirement to get training before the permit’s renewal has been revoked.
“They need range time. Sorry. You need to be able to get out there and be able to fire that firearm. Classroom is fine, but sending somebody out there for two minutes or whatever – because there’s no time requirement on how long they stay on the range and do live fire training.”

What is interesting is that, while reporter Karen Kasler obviously is aware that the both Buckeye Firearms Association and groups like the FOP and OACP have made opposing predictions in the past about what would happen if reforms were passed to improve Ohio's concealed carry law, she made no effort to research which group's predictions have come true.

Perhaps that's because the Ohio FOP and OACP lobbyists have been wrong in their predictions about every single piece of legislation they testified about which has become law in the past decade.

The Ohio FOP and OACP opposed HB 12 (Ohio Concealed Carry), offering similar warnings that have never come to pass. Gilchrist testified that “(OACP) believes…passage of the bill will make the job of a peace officer more dangerous” and that “there will be a net increase in the amount of gun violence.” “Common sense tells us that accidents will become a daily event,” and that “many of those who will carry a concealed weapon will also be under the influence of alcohol.”

The Ohio FOP and OACP opposed Castle Doctrine. Gilchrist, speaking again for OACP, submitted written testimony opposing HB 264 (companion legislation to SB 184, the "Castle Doctrine" law that was passed and signed into law by Governor Strickland), which which he stated "The Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police believes that Ohio will have more violent confrontations that end in death or injury. And these individuals will not have committed a crime. An individual should not be allowed to assert self-defense when he could have easily and safety removed himself from a confrontation." His 2008 testimony concluded, "Lastly, if the common law rules on self-defense are nullified, Ohio will see more violent confrontations."

The Ohio FOP and OACP opposed Restaurant & Car Carry rules fixes. In its opposition testimony to SB 239, the FOP's lobbyist claimed it would allow licensees to drive around "twirling" guns on their finger, allow the use of "quick draw" holsters that are a danger to police and require those going to restaurants to have "designated shooters." He also testified that police officers, but not the general public, should be allowed to drink in restaurants and/or while consuming because they are "better trained," "better decision makers," and have received weapons retention training. He failed to give evidence that police officers are trained on how to carry while consuming alcohol. (Hint: That's because they're not.) Meanwhile, Gilchrist opined that statistics are "worthless" (thus the Senators should ignore any empirical evidence and/or what other states are doing.) He also spouted the tired refrain that guns and alcohol don't mix, that licensees are a safety risk and that he wants licensee information to be public record.

The Ohio FOP and OACP opposed HB 495 (Reciprocity & Concealed Carry Modernization). Judging by his testimony, the FOP lobbyist seems to believe that all law-abiding gun owners are cop-killers in waiting. He objected to a provision fixing the definition of a "loaded" gun in a motor vehicle by suggesting that this change would give an advantage to someone who intends to shoot an approaching officer (as though such a criminal really cares how the law defines a "loaded" gun in the first place!). As for the OACP, Gilchrist offered claims of emotional breakdowns and predictions of dead officers across the state - not to mention felons walking around with concealed handgun licenses, presumably because the law enforcement officials Gilchrist represents aren't telling sheriffs if a licensee screws up. (In other words, by his admission the police and his members aren't doing their job.)

Most recently, the Ohio FOP suggested that the Ohio legislature should strip boards of education of the ability to arm school employees. Unfortunately for Weinman, but fortunately for the state's school children, even the Ohio School Boards Association opposes the removal of local control.

Mike Weinman and John Gilchrist would do well to remember that, as Buckeye Firearms Association Legislative Chair Ken Hanson points out, "We the People grant law enforcement their limited power and authority, not vice versa. Law enforcement is granted their authority and power over citizens by we, the people. We are perfectly within our rights to curtail that authority as we see fit, and it is not up to them to second guess that decision. Their powers come from us; our rights do not come from them."

The next time the FOP fundraiser calls you asking for a donation, I hope you will remember that they will use those funds to fight against your right to bear arms. And I hope you will take it upon yourself to call or email your state representative today and ask them to ignore the sickening predictions voiced by professional paid lobbyists Mike Weinman and John Gilchrist.

Chad D. Baus is the Buckeye Firearms Association Secretary, BFA PAC Vice Chairman, and an NRA-certified firearms instructor. He is the editor of BuckeyeFirearms.org, which received the Outdoor Writers of Ohio 2013 Supporting Member Award for Best Website.

Jim Irvine is the Buckeye Firearms Association President, BFA PAC Chairman and recipient of the NRA-ILA's 2011 "Jay M. Littlefield Volunteer of the Year Award" and the CCRKBA's 2012 "Gun Rights Defender of the Year Award."

Additional Information:

Columbus Dispatch - Bill aimed at clarifying gun laws in school zones passes House committee

Jim Irvine of the Buckeye Firearms Association said the bill simply makes the law easier to understand.

WBNS (CBS Columbus) - Several New Gun Bills Worry Ohio Law Enforcement

"I've called it an embarrassment of riches," said Ken Hanson of the Buckeye Firearms Foundation. "We have a lot of gun bills."

Hanson says the FOP is over reacting to the gun proposals.

"My goodness, when we changed carry in the car they said 'well people are going to be twirling guns on their fingers,'" said Hanson. "They said when we can carry guns in restaurants people would be drinking beers and shooting each other. None of it every comes true."

Help us fight for your rights!

Become a member of Buckeye Firearms Association and support our grassroots efforts to defend and advance YOUR RIGHTS!

Subscribe to our FREE Newsletter

Get weekly news and instant alerts on the latest laws and politics that affect your gun rights. Enjoy cutting-edge commentary. Be among the first to hear about gun raffles, firearms training, and special events. Read more.

We respect your privacy and your email address will be kept confidential.

Mission

Buckeye Firearms Association is a grassroots organization dedicated to defending and advancing the right of citizens to own and use firearms for all legal activities, including self-defense, hunting, competition, and recreation. Read more.

JOIN