Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Lawmakers propose NRA-driven changes to Ohio's self-defense law

  1. #1
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Invisible Mode

    Post imported post

    The NRA juggernaut continues rolling, this time pushing a key law change for Ohioans who have to defend their homes, family or person by using justifiable deadly force.

    I've always been amazed at how good the NRA is at what it does. The NRA has consistently benefited gun-rights advocates and other citizens by being smart, aggressive, strategic and effective.

    The NRA is the best and most effective lobbying group in the history of this country. Kudos go to the Buckeye Firearms Association too for the new bill. BFA seems to me to be a very strong state-level gun-rights advocate, compared to most other states. Those guys are with it.

    But on the national level, every gun owner and carrier owes the NRA a BIG debt for the advocate work it has done on behalf of all.

    Here's the latest proof.

    Lawmakers propose NRA-driven changes to Ohio's self-defense law

    Posted on Wed, Jun. 13, 2007

    Associated Press

    COLUMBUS, Ohio - Trying to build on success that began in Florida and spread to 17 other states, the National Rifle Association started a push in Ohio on Wednesday that would give people more authority to use deadly force to defend themselves both in and outside their homes.

    People who injure or kill an attacker in self defense no longer would shoulder the burden to prove their actions were justifiable under a bill introduced Wednesday by Republican lawmakers. The proposal also would protect people who justifiably kill someone in self defense from civil lawsuits that could require them to pay damages.

    The first similar law passed in Florida in 2005, and Ohio is one of 16 states where the NRA is currently pushing the legislation. The NRA also was responsible for pushing an Ohio law that enabled concealed carry permits for guns.

    The influential gun-rights organization is methodically changing what it sees as laws that give undeserved protection to criminals and place the burden of proof on innocent victims.

    Gun-control advocates argue the bill proposes a solution for a nonexistent problem. And they have said the laws hinge on a subjective interpretation of when a person may feel threatened, potentially leading to overreactions and fatal escalations to conflicts that could be defused by retreating.

    The NRA-driven change - which was introduced with roughly 50 co-sponsors in the House and Senate, including some Democrats - provides the presumption that a person "acted properly in self defense" if the person "was suffering or was about to suffer an offense of violence that was a felony."

    "At the end of the day what we're trying to do is make sure that people feel safer in their home, safer in their community, and take the affirmative steps necessary to protect themselves and their families," said sponsoring Sen. Steve Buehrer, a Republican from Delta.

    Buehrer presented the bill saying it would only make changes to self-defense law for those protecting their home, which he said was his primary concern. But the NRA said language in the bill would also apply outside the home.

    "Whether that ought to apply in other physical places is something we ought to debate," Buehrer said.

    Supporters of the bill provide anecdotes illustrating the need for the change, but mainly argue that it doesn't make sense to place the burden of proof on people trying to defend themselves.

    In a case "where a guy purely, clearly has the right to use self defense, we've had judges say, 'No, the guy with a broken leg should have jumped out the second-story window,'" said Jim Irvine, chairman of the Buckeye Firearms Association.

    NRA regional lobbyist John Hohenwarter predicted the issue will pass easily in the GOP-controlled Legislature.

    "You don't have to be 100 percent on NRA issues to agree that people have a right to defend themselves," he said.

    Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland supports the legislation.

    "The governor is a strong defender of Second Amendment rights and he supports the rights of individuals to defend themselves," spokesman Keith Dailey said.

    Supporters believe the change would enable people to better make decisions about how to respond in a dangerous situation, free of fear they will be prosecuted.

    But a problem with the bill is that people in disputes can "take the law into their own hands," said Toby Hoover, director of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence.

    "The big fear is that people with deadly weapons will now assume they are capable of making a decision of when that can be used, wherever they are," Hoover said.

    Hohenwarter said gun-control advocates sounded the same alarm when concealed carry permits became law in many states. The "Wild West" prediction never materialized, he said.

    Just before a 2005 Florida law went into effect to remove residents' duty to retreat from conflict in public places, a group that supports restrictions on guns handed out fliers in Florida airports warning tourists not to argue with locals because of what they called the "Shoot First" law.

    Under the Florida law protecting people who are attacked, no one has used the new defense successfully to have murder charges dropped or to win acquittal from a jury. However, charges often are not filed in such self-defense cases.

  2. #2
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    , , USA

    Post imported post

    Have I mentioned that I love the NRA? I hope this thing passes. It would be nice to have another one of our rights returned to us here in Ohio. Time to call the state senators and representatives!!

Posting Permissions

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