Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Ohio bill that would bar new local/federal/ international gun bans

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558

    Ohio bill that would bar new local/federal/ international gun bans

    130th General Assembly
    Regular Session
    2013-2014
    S. B. No. 36

    Senator Jordan
    Cosponsor: Senator Schaffer

    A BILL

    To enact sections 5502.23 and 5502.231 of the Revised Code to prohibit any agency and its employees and agents from seizing or authorizing the seizure of any firearm from any person lawfully in possession or control of the firearm except when a law enforcement officer reasonably believes the immediate seizure of the firearm is necessary for the safety of the officer or another person or to preserve the firearm as evidence, to prohibit the establishment of a firearm registry, and to prohibit law enforcement officers and international agents from enforcing a firearms registration requirement or firearm ban.

    BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF OHIO:

    Section 1. That sections 5502.23 and 5502.231 of the Revised Code be enacted to read as follows:

    Sec. 5502.23. (A) Except as provided in division (B) of this section, no agency, or employee or agent of an agency, shall seize or authorize the seizure of any firearm from any person who is lawfully in possession or control of a firearm.

    (B)(1) A law enforcement officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's duties may seize a firearm in the possession, or under the control, of any person if the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the immediate seizure of the firearm is necessary for the safety of the law enforcement officer or another individual. The law enforcement officer shall return the firearm to the person from whom it was seized if the person is not arrested, the firearm is not seized under division (B)(2) of this section, and the reason for the seizure of the firearm no longer exists.

    (2) A law enforcement officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's duties may seize a firearm when the seizure is necessary to preserve the firearm as evidence, or for the investigation, of a criminal offense.

    (C) As used in this section, "firearm" has the same meaning as in section 2923.11 of the Revised Code.

    Sec. 5502.231. (A) No law enforcement officer, federal law enforcement officer, international agent, or other person shall enforce or attempt to enforce a firearm registration requirement or firearm ban in any statute or rule of this state or the United States or any ordinance, resolution, or rule of a political subdivision, unless the registration requirement or ban is in effect prior to the effective date of this section.

    (B) No political subdivision shall enact or adopt any ordinance, resolution, or rule that requires a person to register a firearm or establishes a firearm registry.

    (C) Whoever violates division (A) of this section is guilty of unlawful enforcement of a firearm registration requirement or firearm ban, a felony of the first degree.

    (D) As used in this section:

    (1) "Federal law enforcement officer" has the same meaning as in section 2921.51 of the Revised Code.

    (2) "Firearm" has the same meaning as in section 2923.11 of the Revised Code.

    (3) "Firearm ban" means any ban or prohibition on a person's possession of a firearm that is not based on the status or condition of the person or limited to the possession of a firearm in a school safety zone, courthouse, or other designated location.

    (4) "Political subdivision" has the same meaning as in section 2921.421 of the Revised Code.


    http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/8787
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  2. #2
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    763
    I like it for the most part, but it does still leave the officers open to confiscation as long as they claim it was "for officer safety". all a cop would have to do is say the owner attempted to use the firearm against the officer, and the gun will be confiscated, the owner arrested, and the gun never returned. and no matter what actually happened, the officer would win the case so long as the owner didn't have any rock solid evidence to dispute it
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •