Bill Patmon and Ted Celeste, two Ohio Democrat State Representatives are co-sponsoring a bill, HB595, which would essentially reverse the current law.
According to the bill it is
"to generally prohibit a person from having a firearm on privately owned land or premises unless the person owns, controls, or resides on or in the land or premises, has permission of the owner or person who controls the land or premises and, if the land or premises is rental property, of the tenant when required, or is the tenant with respect to those premises."
It "applies to any person, including a concealed handgun licensee."
The current law allows a person to carry concealed on private property unless there is a sign that prohibits law-abiding Concealed Carry Weapon permit (CCW) holders to stay out. The new bill would now require CCW licensees to obtain permission from any and all properties that they would step foot on with their weapon.
It would also require non-tenants on rented or leased property to also obtain permission before venturing onto property with a firearm.
With this piece of legislation, one could not enter a business, a residence or any private property with their weapons unless they had obtained oral or written permission from the owner to do so.
Why would this effectively kill concealed carry? Consider that a person might visit more than a dozen different homes and places of business during the day. Also consider the fact that it restricts the Constitution's Second Amendment right to not only keep but bear arms.
Persons and businesses who agree with CCW being allowed on their property or place of business could provide blanket authorization in the form of a sign posted on the property, but it really is unnecessary considering the law of the land, the US Constitution provides that right in the first place.
Rep Patmon had already submitted further legislation earlier this year in June that would
"prohibit any person from storing or leaving a firearm in the person's residence unless the firearm is secured in safe storage or rendered inoperable by a tamper-resistant lock or other safety device if the person knows or reasonably should know that a minor is able to gain access to the firearm and to provide criminal penalties if a minor gains unauthorized access to a firearm not so stored or rendered inoperable."
My question to those of you in Ohio is "Why are you putting up with such people are your representatives?"Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.