Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: another OC/CC question

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    I don't have a CCW so I don't really know a whole lot about this section of the law. I actually refuse to get one. But, my question is: can I be told that I cannot carry a weapon into another persons home in which I have been invited, or vice versa. Just not sure, hoping somebody might know more than me.

  2. #2
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    My understanding is that the property owner's right supersede your 2nd amendment rights when you are on his property. In other words, if the property owner asks you to leave, and you refuse, you are trespassing. That seems to open a whole other can of worms, though. Does the property owner now feel threatened because you have a gun and refuse to leave. Does he pull a gun and shoot you? I will look through the Ohio Revised Code to see if I can find something. Here's the link, and you might even find it before me.

    BTW, welcome to OCDO!

    http://codes.ohio.gov/orc


  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    TY - you seem to be very educated in this end of the law. Glad I have comeacross a nice resource for this kind of information. Highly appreciated.

  4. #4
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    Not really. I just have stumbled across things over time. And btw, I'm not a lawyer, so don't just take my word as gospel. It's always best to ask a lawyer, or research and read the law for yourself. Even the best educated and nicest people can be wrong.

  5. #5
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,737

    Post imported post

    You did not give your location/state.

    If Ohio and your are asked to leave and you don't, you could be charged with criminal trespass-firearm or not.


    Duties of licensed individual.
    2923.126(C)(3) The owner or person in control of private land or premises, and a private person or entity leasing land or premises owned by the state, the United States, or a political subdivision of the state or the United States, may post a sign in a conspicuous location on that land or on those premises prohibiting persons from carrying firearms or concealed firearms on or onto that land or those premises. A person who knowingly violates a posted prohibition of that nature is guilty of criminal trespass in violation of division (A)(4) of section 2911.21 of the Revised Code and is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

    Criminal Trespass
    2911.21(A) No person, without privilege to do so, shall do any of the following:
    (1) Knowingly enter or remain on the land or premises of another;
    (2) Knowingly enter or remain on the land or premises of another, the use of which is lawfully restricted to certain persons, purposes, modes, or hours, when the offender knows the offender is in violation of any such restriction or is reckless in that regard;
    (3) Recklessly enter or remain on the land or premises of another, as to which notice against unauthorized access or presence is given by actual communication to the offender, or in a manner prescribed by law, or by posting in a manner reasonably calculated to come to the attention of potential intruders, or by fencing or other enclosure manifestly designed to restrict access;
    (4) Being on the land or premises of another, negligently fail or refuse to leave upon being notified by signage posted in a conspicuous place or otherwise being notified to do so by the owner or occupant, or the agent or servant of either.
    (B) It is no defense to a charge under this section that the land or premises involved was owned, controlled, or in custody of a public agency.
    (C) It is no defense to a charge under this section that the offender was authorized to enter or remain on the land or premises involved, when such authorization was secured by deception.
    (D) Whoever violates this section is guilty of criminal trespass, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.
    (E) As used in this section, “land or premises” includes any land, building, structure, or place belonging to, controlled by, or in custody of another, and any separate enclosure or room, or portion thereof.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    Oh, don't worry, I am chopping throught that link you sent me. TY again.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    So can I post a sign disallowing Police enforcement to carry firearms on my property? Or am I not reading that properly? It doesn't specify "persons" if you read that properly.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    Well, the police can only accost someone on their property with permission, probable cause (or perhaps the weaker "reasonable suspicion" standardin some instances), or in executing a warrant. If they show up and want to throw their weight around, tell them they are unwelcome and that they have to leave. If they have cause or a warrant, believe me, they won't ask permission 1st. Conversely, if they do ask permission, then they have neither PC nor a warrant. They often say "we can get one" in response to "do you have a warrant?" but it's a ruse. They'd have brought one with them if that were the case. Just say no.

    I would add that adversarial meetings with police ought to be handled gingerly. Discretion is the better part of a beating, jail, trial, etc. Never raise you voice or your hands (unless ordered to), don't use profanity, don't tell them that you pay their salary (even I hate that nonsense) - stick to the facts without getting excited. Remember that you don't owe them any explanations and if they want to think you're hiding something, let them. Better to be thought guilty than to speak and confirm it. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Absolutely goddamned right.

    -ljp


  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    I just find it oddly funny how vague the law is right there with the wording. But I would never letpolice in my home without a warrant, and you are right; if they had one they wouldn't be asking - I would find my door being kicked in.

  10. #10
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,737

    Post imported post

    "Open fields doctrine" - Police have a right to come to your Front door. As far as your back door, that's a toss-up. If its fenced in then the police may have a problem. Google "Curtilage."

    The "affidavit of probable cause" attached to the warrant is more important than the warrant itself.

    We can go on and on about this stuff.

    I believe it should be mandatory that every senior high school student take 4 quarters of general law classes. Understanding your rights.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    I agree. I think that people are not taught about their individual rights purposefully. It would be to hard for the government to pull the blinders over our eyes if everyone was practically a lawyer.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Jefferson, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    49

    Post imported post

    cilcannonvryce wrote:
    I don't have a CCW so I don't really know a whole lot about this section of the law. I actually refuse to get one. But, my question is: can I be told that I cannot carry a weapon into another persons home in which I have been invited, or vice versa. Just not sure, hoping somebody might know more than me.
    Why do you refuse to get a CCW? Just curious:?

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    sorry been gone for a few days, but to answer your question. I think that requiring citizens to register for a license to carry a gun in any way shape or form is unconstitutional - plain and simple. its is just another way for the government to keep track of who's got 'em. Any specific reason you wanna know?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Jefferson, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    49

    Post imported post

    cilcannonvryce wrote:
    sorry been gone for a few days, but to answer your question. I think that requiring citizens to register for a license to carry a gun in any way shape or form is unconstitutional - plain and simple. its is just another way for the government to keep track of who's got 'em. Any specific reason you wanna know?
    Just curious. That was the first time i heard someone say that.:shock:

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    Np, I prefer to O/C anyway - one does not need a license for this sort of behavior. I hope you don't think I am some crazy radical moron who is gonna ruin it for everyone else. I just think there is too many laws in general - especially pertaining to the area of firearms. Makes me feel our governing bodies lack trust in the people, and from where I am standing - the only reason they would not trust the citizens is if they were up to no good and felt they had a reason to look over their shoulder.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Jefferson, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    49

    Post imported post

    I agree on way to many firearms laws.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ravenna, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    I understand your point on the CCW. I personally think it sucks as well. However, my wife and I are scheduled to take our class early next year. We will OC most of the time but find the 'vehicle transport' laws to be a pain in the ass. Without a permit it just doesn't make much sense to risk the trouble. If I have a permit my pistol stays on me at all times. None of this unholster, unload, lock the gun, lock the ammo bullcrap. If someone decides they want to car jack me and my clip is locked in the glove box and my gun is locked in the trunk I am screwed. That being said I absolutely refuse to break the laws regarding my right to carry a pistol. All it takes is one overly oppressive LEO to make my life a living hell. So you gotta' get a CCW. Who cares? The system isn't perfect and a lot of the laws blow but risking losing your carrying rights completely due to a transport violation is absurd to me. I can't justify screaming about protecting my rights as if I am openly defying the law. (regarless if that law makes zero sense to me) You have to change the system with the system. I don't know. That is just my take on the issue. Good luck!

    As for your question about private property... I guess the guys have already taken care of that one. If I know who you are you are more than welcome into my home while packing. However, if I don't know you and you are armed I will assume you mean to harm my family and I will give you the choice to disarm yourself or be shot. (unless you happen to be a cop. in that case i will simply ask you to leave)

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    Well Pauly, I understand and I appreciate that you prefer to be law abiding citizen. In fact I applaud you. There are a lot of people who don't care what the law says, and that can negatively affect things for all of us who choose to carry in a law abiding manner. I think everyone in this forum is in the same boat on this one too.
    I obey the law 100% concerning my firearms and everything I do with them, but that does not mean the law is just or right in its implementation. That is why I am refusing to support this flawed system of CCW. I simply refuse to by into the CCW program an register with it. I personally find it to be a program that supports unconstitutionalism, because as I have stated before: the law should never restrict or infringe a citizens right to carry a gun for self protection, regardless if it is O/C or C/C.
    The transportation thing also creates a lot of stink in my opinion, and I am sorry that one needs a CCW to transport a firearm in a vehicle, I find that ludicrous. Isn't that the whole Legba Vs. Ohio case right now?
    I also understand the system ins't perfect, I just hope for it to be better and much less flawed, where the laws that would be in place would be fewer and thus not so conflicting with one another.

    Another perspective - the Government is a business and they have found another way to make money off of something being illegal. Sound familiar? They do it with drug prohibition everyday. I also refuse to pay any Government cash money for my rights. If the people in the beginning would have recognized the Pork Barrelling Schema behind the CCW program and refused to support it by simply drawing up a bill requesting that the laws be changed as far as transporting a firearm, we would never have this loop in place. But I don't blame the people, I believe we are taken advantage of. The government knew that this could happen and probably would happen, so they are trying to make as much money off of it as possible before it changes. Oh, and I care.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    Yeah, the transport laws are unconstitutionally vague, in my opinion - too much room for arbitrary enforcement. My case is still in limbo - the next preliminary hearing isn't until mid-February, with no trial date even scheduled as yet. If I end up with a hung jury and a retrial, this thing might drag out a full year. I doubt I'll get convicted in any case, but I'm not going to give in. They refused to even offer me a misdemeanor plea deal before, so I'm holding out for full acquittal. Maybe by then they will have fixed the law(s) so nobody else has to go through this nonsense. Write your statehouse reps/senators in the meantime and see if it can be expedited.

    -ljp

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ravenna, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    106

    Post imported post

    cilcannonvryce wrote:
    Well Pauly, I understand and I appreciate that you prefer to be law abiding citizen. In fact I applaud you. There are a lot of people who don't care what the law says, and that can negatively affect things for all of us who choose to carry in a law abiding manner. I think everyone in this forum is in the same boat on this one too.
    I obey the law 100% concerning my firearms and everything I do with them, but that does not mean the law is just or right in its implementation. That is why I am refusing to support this flawed system of CCW. I simply refuse to by into the CCW program an register with it. I personally find it to be a program that supports unconstitutionalism, because as I have stated before: the law should never restrict or infringe a citizens right to carry a gun for self protection, regardless if it is O/C or C/C.
    The transportation thing also creates a lot of stink in my opinion, and I am sorry that one needs a CCW to transport a firearm in a vehicle, I find that ludicrous. Isn't that the whole Legba Vs. Ohio case right now?
    I also understand the system ins't perfect, I just hope for it to be better and much less flawed, where the laws that would be in place would be fewer and thus not so conflicting with one another.

    Another perspective - the Government is a business and they have found another way to make money off of something being illegal. Sound familiar? They do it with drug prohibition everyday. I also refuse to pay any Government cash money for my rights. If the people in the beginning would have recognized the Pork Barrelling Schema behind the CCW program and refused to support it by simply drawing up a bill requesting that the laws be changed as far as transporting a firearm, we would never have this loop in place. But I don't blame the people, I believe we are taken advantage of. The government knew that this could happen and probably would happen, so they are trying to make as much money off of it as possible before it changes. Oh, and I care.
    Thanks for giving me your insight. I agree 100% with everything you said. I never really thought of it in that manner. It is a real dilema they have put us in here.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    Keep fighting them Legba and don't give up. I wish I could do more for you. What the legal system is doing to you is sooooo wrong.

  22. #22
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,737

    Post imported post

    Ohio law makers have no spines. They won't write a clear and concised law. They want the courts to deside what the law says. That gives the law makers Plausible deniability. Well, now that alot of you are complaining we didn't mean what the courts said it says. Though people have gone to jail, I guess we need to fix it. So how is this ambiguous wording.

    Indiana law says that the law must be written in clear and concised everyday language. Not Ohio, lets write it so everybody does not have a clue as to what it says or means. Or better yet, lets let the courts define the words. How else can we screw you out of your rights.





  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    HMMMMM. Call me an anarchists but I have a simple solution for this problem: Either adapt Indiana's "Clear and Concise" policy on the verbiage issue, or we all go Henry the 6th on them. Sorry, Sarcasm - violence rarely solves anything. Anywho, you are 100% correct. Plausible deniability, another thing that is labyrinthian in itself. I believe that the Ohio voters need to take hold of the problem - literally. I know that is asking a lot. But these problems are not gonna go away by themselves, and nor are the lawmaker or interpreters gonna help; track record has proven that they only make it worse. Sometimes the "people" collectively need to take the law into their own hands.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    Well, "the people" ultimately do hold the power to administer the laws, vis the jury system. I can only hope that a dozen disinterested people see the unreasonableness of all this and acquit me outright. If it were up to the police, prosecutors, and judges, I'd be on a chain gang already, with a very long time left on my sentence.

    -ljp

Posting Permissions

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