Page 1 of 2 [ 17 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author
Message
Post subject: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Tue Apr 19, 2016 11:43 am
SB 199 is a bill that would allow active duty members of the U.S. Armed forces to carry a concealed handgun without a CHL if the member is carrying a valid military identification card and a certificate indicating successful small arms qualification.

Also saw this on Facebook:

Quote:
Are you a Veteran discharged in the last 5-8 years or an active duty service-member based on Ohio? We need your help.

A bill is before the Ohio Senate that allows you to carry a concealed handgun without going through the Ohio licensing process. The only problem is that it also requires you carry proof of your training. Your Military ID isn't enough.

We need help moving an amendment to the bill that changes this. Your Military ID should be enough. We all get sufficient training and don't need to carry around our training records to carry concealed handguns in Ohio.

Please post here or message me if you are willing and able to help. Public testimony is on Wednesday in Columbus. Written testimony is also encouraged.

Please share this post as well.

Tanfoglio 45/22 Target Pistol
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 4:52 am
Posts: 191
Location: Columbus, OH USA
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:21 pm
I've been informed that this passed 32-0 in the Ohio Senate yesterday (usually they are the slowest of the two chambers to pass anything) and it now goes to the House for consideration, changes, etc.

I'm not completely on board with this bill, but it has the tinge of "feel good patriotism" from its Republican sponsors, so it may sail through.

My objections are based on the fact that many active duty personnel have zero or very little trigger time with handguns as part of their training. Not that I am being hypocritical, since the whole licensing process is too much asking for permission to exercise a right to begin with. (Ohio is fully cognizant that OPEN carry is lawful.) But handing out said licenses to those with no appropriate firearms training bothers me some.

"I have decided not to vote, speak in public, assemble in groups or petition my government either directly or by writing to the newspapers.

Some ignorant person may become alarmed, and we can't have that.''

--CAR15A2, 3/31/09
Top
Offline
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:07 pm
Posts: 1906
Location: SW Ohio
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:17 pm
Brian D. wrote:
handing out said licenses to those with no appropriate firearms training bothers me some.

And here I thought you were a proponent of unlicensed aka "constitutional carry".

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 680
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 2:55 pm
If any member of our military can learn something from the Ohio CHL class, we really need to rethink military training. I think anyone who can learn something from the Ohio CHL class probably should not cross the street without supervision. More people are injured accidentally with kitchen knives. Maybe we should require safeties on kitchen knives and make people pay NRA instructors to show people how not to cut their fingers while chopping veggies.

Guns are simple machines. They have an handle to hold on to and a lever to press when you want the bullet to come out of it. If someone is trying to kill you, you point it at them and squeeze. If you don't want to kill someone, you don't point it at them. Read the manual to learn how to clean and maintain it.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Last edited by Liberty on Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 444
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:45 pm
Let me be clear that I do not think government-mandated training should be required to carry a handgun or other weapon for self defense. But saying that "If any member of our military can learn something from the Ohio CHL class, we really need to rethink military training." I believe is a bit off base.

Considering how few members of our military get any *handgun* training whatsoever, I suspect a well-run CHL class can provide some knowledge they do not necessarily possess as a result of their military background. That, plus reviewing practical aspects of carrying and Ohio self defense and firearms law is likely something they did not get whilst serving.

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 680
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:00 pm
Cleaning one's self after a BM is more complicated than using a handgun, and we don't need the NRA to show us how to do that. And "reviewing practical aspects of carrying?" Buy a holster that is comfortable. Picking out shoes is more complected. Self defense and firearms law should be covered in senior government class in high school.

And, if you are correct about the current state of military training, we do need to rethink our military training. A military that has members who don't know the first thing about using a handgun is woefully unprepared for combat.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 444
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:34 pm
Liberty wrote:
And, if you are correct about the current state of military training, we do need to rethink our military training. A military that has members who don't know the first thing about using a handgun is woefully unprepared for combat.


Apparently you have no idea, both what our military receives as training, and what weapons training they need to be prepared for duty. Hint: Only about 1/4 of the Army are in Combat roles, and only a fraction of those in the military are issued sidearms (officers and senior NCOs and a very few specialized roles outside of those ranks, like MPs). And that's the Army, the Air Force is a completely different world where they *might* get rifle training in boot but it is a rare MOS indeed that gets issued a sidearm.

So from the perspective of handgun training, the vast majority of ex-military are no different than random civilians.

Liberty wrote:
And "reviewing practical aspects of carrying?" Buy a holster that is comfortable. Picking out shoes is more complected.


Right, to someone with no experience carrying a handgun it is obvious what types of holsters there are and what things to consider. They have the benefit of a lifetime of experience picking out shoes, but most people have nothing to fall back on when deciding how to carry and what holster options there are, not to mention belts, magazine carriers, speedloaders / speed strips, and so on. And going beyond that, *where* they can and cannot carry, *what* they can and cannot carry, and on, and on. But of course, *everyone* should already know such things without benefit of a class designed to teach them. Of course, they can learn such things on their own if they are so inclined - except they don't.

Again, I am not saying that a CCW class should be required to carry a handgun for self defense. But saying that the average ex-military member cannot benefit from a good class is mistaken in my opinion.

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 680
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 6:09 pm
Thank you for making my point. People should know; just like they are required to know if you stick a fork in someone's eye, it will hurt them. People are required to know most other laws without government mandated training. People don't know about firearms because the government and the complicit media and NRA propagate hoplophobia. Firearms use is as simple as I have described. If it is dangerous and complicated, that justifies the government (compelling governmental interest) in regulating it.

I know some of you guys make money doing training, but the way we do it now should change. It should be taught at home and in school. I am not against the training. I am against deliberately creating and maintaining a population that needs such training as adults.

And for the military, I think it is actually less than 1/4 in combat roles; or at least it used to be. But that should change too. What if the enemy gets into the quartermaster's building? When I joined the MC, it was assumed that that everyone knew how to shoot. Anyone who didn't would have been the butt of every joke. And if you can use an M16, you can use an handgun. They are not that different.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 444
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:00 pm
JustaShooter wrote:
Brian D. wrote:
handing out said licenses to those with no appropriate firearms training bothers me some.

And here I thought you were a proponent of unlicensed aka "constitutional carry".


You tryin' to pick a fight wit' me? :mrgreen: Certainly I'm a proponent of open carry. What I don't like is the state suddenly handing out concealed carry licenses to a select group that hasn't gone through the educational process (and attendant expense)they have, for so long, insisted was vital to all previous licensees.

"I have decided not to vote, speak in public, assemble in groups or petition my government either directly or by writing to the newspapers.

Some ignorant person may become alarmed, and we can't have that.''

--CAR15A2, 3/31/09
Top
Offline
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:07 pm
Posts: 1906
Location: SW Ohio
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:12 pm
And Liberty, don't you go jumping in on me, either. :lol: By now I've lost count of the number of non-combat veterans from the Army, Navy, and especially the Air Force whose firearms training given was somewhere between minimal, and pathetic. With the AF, we're talking 50 rounds at 25 yards using an AR converted to .22 long rifle. (If the first 40 shots hit the target, they got the passing grade and were free to leave.)

I'm not exaggerating. No instruction in maintenance or cleaning, they were shown how to load and fire, and looked at a drawing of a proper sight picture before hitting the range, that's it.

"I have decided not to vote, speak in public, assemble in groups or petition my government either directly or by writing to the newspapers.

Some ignorant person may become alarmed, and we can't have that.''

--CAR15A2, 3/31/09
Top
Offline
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:07 pm
Posts: 1906
Location: SW Ohio
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:20 pm
You seem to think I am advocating for mandatory training. I am not, and don't know how much more clear I can be as I have stated it in each reply: I do not think government-mandated training should be required to carry a handgun or other weapon for self defense.

Nor do I make money at the training I provide as an instructor. I have managed to cover expenses and that is about it - but I'm also not trying to make money at it, but rather enjoy teaching and helping others clear that government-mandated hurdle to being legally able to carry a handgun for self defense.

But, firearms use is not as simple as you have described. OK, "use" as in pull the trigger and it goes bang, yes. But the fundamentals of shooting a handgun well are not that simple or intuitive, and are difficult to master on ones own.

Training on proper and effective use of a handgun is beneficial, whether or not as you put it "because the government and the complicit media and NRA propagate hoplophobia." Many people who have grown up in a pro-gun culture yet without benefit of good training are remarkably deficient in marksmanship and safe handling of a firearm. Likewise, though many of the skills of effective rifle marksmanship transfer over to a handgun it is still a very different skill to master, and to say that "if you can use an M16, you can use an handgun. They are not that different." is a considerable oversimplification of the differences. Add to that how poor our military standards currently are for rifle marksmanship so even if it were the case, it remains true that most former military just aren't any better than your average civilian with a handgun.

Your argument that "People are required to know most other laws without government mandated training" falls flat, in my opinion. First, there's that implication I support government mandated training - I do not. I have simply stated that former service men and women can benefit from the training, in part because such aspects are covered in well-run classes.

Further, "Most other laws" are reasonably intuitive and common sense, but many are not - especially the further away from common law you get. Were firearm and self-defense laws not as convoluted and contrived by the self-same government you decry as promoting a hoplophobic culture it might be different - but the reality is, too much of what people "know" about firearm and self-defense law is incorrect, based on what they see on TV or from Hollywood, or on another state's laws (if they were intuitive and / or based on common sense, wouldn't they be consistent from state to state?), or just random hearsay. Having a training class that covers those topics is a good thing, especially when the consequences of failing to follow them are as drastic as they are.

"It should be taught at home and in school." Now this I can wholeheartedly agree with. But until that time, the training available through CCW classes has a place - again, not as a mandatory requirement for carrying a handgun or other weapon for self defense, but the benefit is there for those that would seek it.

To wrap this up, I look forward to the day that the training is not mandatory - and for the day that the relevant laws are simplified and based on freedom, liberty and a healthy dose of common sense rather than some government official's pandering to the uninformed populace as a feel-good measure to convince them that he is "doing something" to "prevent crime" or "protect the children" or whatever the theme of the day may be.

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 680
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:22 pm
Brian D. wrote:
JustaShooter wrote:
Brian D. wrote:
handing out said licenses to those with no appropriate firearms training bothers me some.

And here I thought you were a proponent of unlicensed aka "constitutional carry".


You tryin' to pick a fight wit' me? :mrgreen: Certainly I'm a proponent of open carry. What I don't like is the state suddenly handing out concealed carry licenses to a select group that hasn't gone through the educational process (and attendant expense)they have, for so long, insisted was vital to all previous licensees.

LOL, just poking at you - I know where you stand, and figured your issue with it was about some being more equal than others. But you opened the door to a bit of fun, so... :mrgreen:

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 680
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 7:26 pm
Brian D. wrote:
By now I've lost count of the number of non-combat veterans from the Army, Navy, and especially the Air Force whose firearms training given was somewhere between minimal, and pathetic. With the AF, we're talking 50 rounds at 25 yards using an AR converted to .22 long rifle. (If the first 40 shots hit the target, they got the passing grade and were free to leave.)

I'm not exaggerating. No instruction in maintenance or cleaning, they were shown how to load and fire, and looked at a drawing of a proper sight picture before hitting the range, that's it.

Your description matches my experience with former military. I've had a number of them in classes I've taught, and known and shot with quite a few more. And if I didn't know their background I'd never have picked them as former military by their shooting skills, especially with a handgun. They were essentially indistinguishable from most other people I've had in class or shot with at the range.

Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:36 am
Posts: 680
Location: Akron/Canton
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:28 pm
Brian D. wrote:
veterans from the Army, Navy, and especially the Air Force whose firearms training given was somewhere between minimal, and pathetic.

And therein lies the problem. I was in the other department, i.e., the men's department. The only Air Force veteran I know is my father, and he was a survival instructor during the beginning of the cold war. Family dinner prep consisted of him shooting ducks in our back yard with a Ruger Mark I like dirty harry. He taught us how to make a whistle from a tree branch and a teepee with a pocket knife, 4 dead dear and some tree branches.

And marksmanship and legal self defense are almost always two different things. If you need to aim, the person you are shooting at is probably not a threat that would justify self defense. I just think that if we can stop the hoplophobia, there will be very little need for training for self defense firearm use, and there will be no excuse for the government to regulate it.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.
Top
Offline
User avatar
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:45 am
Posts: 444
Location: Akron
Post subject: Re: Ohio SB 199
Post Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2016 1:40 am
I've posted this before, but it's early enough in the evening to run off at the keyboard again :) ....

I favor some training. The NRA course I took in 2004 as part of the CHL training was primarily a "don't shoot the guy beside you" course, but given the number of classmates who barely knew what a gun was, probably was a good idea.

Time was that grandpa or dad would sit us down and really teach us about the family blunderbuss over the fireplace (or something like that). Until they were satisfied, you didn't touch it at all, or at least only when under extreme supervision.

Doesn't necessarily work that way now....

Meantime, OH's laws are screwy enough to require some training, just to protect yourself from them....

What bothers me about SB199 is that it may be a setup against us.... "Here's a guy who had significant military training and he still shot the neighbor kid delivering cookies. How can we trust all of those folks who haven't had this much training?" Never mind that the training that's being referred to could have been as simple as "this is a gun."

(I'm not convinced that those who can handle an M16 can expect to handle a pistol. Overall safety, maybe, but I don't think you can go past that for some people.)

Just IMHO....

Stu

(Why write a quick note when you can write a novel?)

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE

יזכר לא עד פעם
Top
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 11:01 pm
Posts: 6704
Location: Youngstown OH
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 2 [ 17 posts ] Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Search for:
Jump to: