Gun backers upset that penalties still part of bill

Gun politics dominated the Ohio Statehouse on Tuesday.

The day started with the introduction of a new, controversial “stand-yourground” bill. It ended with committee passage of a bill that would slash penalties against conceal-carry permit holders who fail to alert police that they’re packing when lawfully detained.

The latter measure, House Bill 142, was a watered-down substitute for an original bill that would have wiped out penalties altogether. It did, however, cut the penalty for not speaking up about your guns from a misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine to just a $25 fine.

To the frustration of some pro-gun lawmakers, the compromise wasn’t enough for some gun-rights advocates.

Chris Dorr, director of Ohio Gun Owners, asked, “Who is this committee trying to placate?” Answering himself, he said it must be people who don’t have “full restoration of gun-owners’ rights at heart.”

Gary Witt, director of Ohio Concealed Carry, said that when law-enforcement groups say it puts officers in danger when they don’t know about permit holders’ guns during detentions and traffic stops, they’re making “false claims.”

As with Dorr, Witt said his group was opposed to anything short of scrapping the penalties.

And as with a few other progun Republicans, Rep. John Becker of Union Township seemed incredulous.

“This legislation is way more than half a loaf,” he said. “It’s everything but the last slice.”

The measure, which did have the support of the Buckeye Firearms Association, passed the House Federalism and Interstate Regulations Committee 9-2. It goes now to the full House.

On the other side of the Statehouse, controversial “stand-your-ground” was introduced Tuesday morning in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Senate Bill 180 would ease the legal requirement to retreat in many situations before shooting at a perceived threat. It would also shift to and increase the burden on prosecutors to prove that that shooters claiming selfdefense did not act to defend themselves.

Some of its provisions were included in a sweeping gun bill passed by the Ohio House in 2013, but those sections were later stripped out by the Senate.

The bill “seeks to modernize Ohio’s self-defense laws,” said one of its sponsors, Sen. Joe Uecker, R-Miami Township.

He was referring to a portion of the proposal that would end Ohio’s present requirement that a person who kills claiming self defense prove the claim based on a preponderance of evidence — meaning he or she would have to show that the claim of self defense is more likely true than false. Under the new measure, prosecutors would have to show that the person did not act in self defense and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Uecker said the provision is only fair.

“Current Ohio law is giving more legal protections to the perpetrators of violent crimes than to the victims of violent crimes,” he said.

Sen. Sean O’Brien, D-Bazetta, disagreed. A former prosecutor, O’Brien said that in many such cases, the person who was shot is dead and can’t testify about who the aggressor was. He said SB 180 would force prosecutors to meet the highest standard in disproving self defense claims when they already have to prove a person’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

“Now we’re adding an additional burden,” O’Brien said.

Many law enforcement groups also oppose the legislation, noting that it’s incumbent on officers to try to de-escalate confrontations before shooting even though they’re responsible for removing threats.

“If an individual has an opportunity to walk away, that works fairly well,” said Sen. Cecil Thomas, D-Cincinnati, a former police officer.

Also discussed — but not voted on — Tuesday was House Bill 253, which would allow off-duty police officers to carry weapons in many places where they’re otherwise prohibited. That proposal has the support of the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police.