Ohio joins Tenn and Montana in the fight for firearm freedom.

Printable View

10-27-2009, 06:47
DOC

Ohio joins Tenn and Montana in the fight for firearm freedom.

Quote:

http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/b...ID=128_HB_315_

A BILL
To enact section 2923.26 of the Revised Code to provide that ammunition, firearms, and firearm accessories that are manufactured and remain in Ohio are not subject to federal laws and regulations derived under Congress' authority to regulate interstate commerce and to require the words "Made in Ohio" be stamped on a central metallic part of any firearm manufactured and sold in Ohio.
(2) "Firearm accessories" means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of the firearm, including, but not limited to, telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.

While the law doesn't seem to do anything new since the sunset of the Assault Weapons Ban. It does allow evil sound suppressors to be made and used without all the trouble of registering it at the federal level.
It seems to copy Montana's law verbatim. Although, Montana's original law did have a provision to allow machine guns. That was cool. I'm sure it can be added later once the courts rule in the states favor.
But I feel a little bad that we haven't had a colorado law on this yet. I'm sure we are working on it.
10-27-2009, 08:00
DeusExMachina

I am surprised about Ohio. I would think CO would do somehing like that before OH.
10-27-2009, 08:47
DOC

It would blow my mind if California introduced a law like this.
10-27-2009, 10:06
Irving

Well, can't any ole Joe introduce a law like this? I'm happy to see more states put this on the docket, but that doesn't mean they'll be voted in right? Someone help me out here.
10-27-2009, 10:33
GreenScoutII

Well Sturtle, as far as I know, any citizen can propose a bill but one needs a congressman or senator to actually introduce it. At least thats what I remember from high school civics class. Maybe someone else here can elaborate.

I think it would be awesome to end run the Federal govt. on this. I think its stupid to not allow full autos (post 86) for civilians. What is even more stupid than that is the severe restrictions on suppressors. In some places in Europe, where they have Draconian gun laws, a guy can purchase a supressor over the counter. A supressor isn't even a weapon, except in the eyes of the BATF...

Another good thing that might come from this is if a guy could buy these over the counter, the prices of these items might come down a lot. Better yet, a guy could make his own.

I personally don't have much interest in full autos. I can barely afford ammo as it is, but I hate the idea that the Govt doesn't want me to have one. At least not without jumping through all the hoops. I would however, LOVE to get my hands on a suppressor or two. Eventually, when funds allow, I'll do all the necessary paperwork and get one or two. I think they would be great for varmint hunting. Particularly prairie dogs.

If anyone knows how to get a bill like this going in Colorado, let me know. I'll help in any way I can.
10-27-2009, 10:44
Irving

Scout, there are some great write ups on building your own suppressors for cheap. Then it would only cost you the price of the stamp.
10-27-2009, 10:45
DeusExMachina

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sturtle

Scout, there are some great write ups on building your own suppressors for cheap. Then it would only cost you the price of the stamp.

Can you still do a trust when you build it? I'm assuming yes but I figured I'd ask.
10-27-2009, 10:47
Irving

As far as I know you can. Most people who make their own cans (from what I've seen) do rifle cans, or .22lr cans so they don't have to deal with making a can work without a nielson(sp?) device. I've seen a pretty cool write up where a guy made a .22lr can out of freeze plugs for only a few dollars.
10-27-2009, 12:22
Daniel_187

So if Colorado Passed something like this would that mean that there could be a can shop in Colorado. and all you would do is go down there and buy it, like a mattress?
10-27-2009, 12:32
Irving

That's the way that I understand it. I've heard you can get suppressors over the counter at sporting goods stores in France for like $20. I think they just use them on their girl friends and to hold doors open and stuff though. ;)
10-27-2009, 13:51
Daniel_187

LOL, Yeah Hannu was telling me the France's gun laws are really good compaired to the rest of Europe its a little more laxed I guess. who would have thought
10-27-2009, 14:38
GreenScoutII

Speaking of European gun laws... A while back I worked on a job where the owner of the building was a Swiss immigrant to the US. I knew Switzerland was a good place to be a gun owner, but when he told me about their policies concerning assault weapons, I almost died of jealousy! It seems that while a guy is in their equivalent of the Army reserve, he is issued a Sig-Sauer SG550 which he must keep in his home, ready for combat, untill his term of service expires. After that, if he wants to keep his rifle, they will convert it to semi-auto and then its his..

That rifle gives me a boner...
10-28-2009, 06:33
ryanek9freak

I lived in Ohio for 20 years. This kind of suprises me. I mean, there's alot of hunters there and lots of guns, but the Ohio legislature doesn't have a good track record on being firearms friendly.
10-28-2009, 10:48
DOC

I'm glad states are waking up and smelling the coffee. I am one of those frogs that have been sitting in the pot of luke warm for twenty years. They keep threatening to boil it, but I'm ready to get out now. Let them start from scratch.
10-28-2009, 12:04
DOC

I asked a senator on face book how to introduce a new bill. He hasn't gotten back to me yet. But I hope he's not ignoring me.
He didn't want to use FB for business. But I'm not familiar with introducing bills so if he has some sort of dance or ritual to impress the gods other that straight forward asking he's going to have to explain it to me.
10-28-2009, 14:01
Nix

It appears Colorado is planning on following suit (along with many other states). I can't recall where I read it now, but I believe it is to be introduced in Colorado next year.

http://firearmsfreedomact.com
10-28-2009, 16:00
sniper7

more states will follow. there have been several letters to FFLs though telling them even if the firearms are made in such a state that passes it that they are a federal dealer subject to federal fines and federal prosecution. I think the state should issue a state dealer license (don't even know if it would be required), but if you weren't an FFL and selling the guns purely under the states laws, it would be conceivable that it would be alright?

what say you guys?

I still think the feds would step in and say the guy would be acting as an FFL without such a license. it might take a supreme court ruling on this one.

I also think that if the chicago ban that was upheld there is upheld in the supreme court, then it is apparent federal law does not supersede state law and these states would have a case against the feds. they can't have it all. either states follow the feds rules which currently says no bans, or feds have to grant the states rules.
10-28-2009, 16:02
sniper7

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenScoutII

Speaking of European gun laws... A while back I worked on a job where the owner of the building was a Swiss immigrant to the US. I knew Switzerland was a good place to be a gun owner, but when he told me about their policies concerning assault weapons, I almost died of jealousy! It seems that while a guy is in their equivalent of the Army reserve, he is issued a Sig-Sauer SG550 which he must keep in his home, ready for combat, untill his term of service expires. After that, if he wants to keep his rifle, they will convert it to semi-auto and then its his..

That rifle gives me a boner...

yes but I think you are only issued 50 rounds which are sealed, and the rifle and ammo is checked on by authorities at certain times (or maybe even any given time).

we have it better here. with the right amount of money you can have anything you want in this country.
10-28-2009, 16:08
Nix

Quote:

Originally Posted by sniper7

more states will follow. there have been several letters to FFLs though telling them even if the firearms are made in such a state that passes it that they are a federal dealer subject to federal fines and federal prosecution. I think the state should issue a state dealer license (don't even know if it would be required), but if you weren't an FFL and selling the guns purely under the states laws, it would be conceivable that it would be alright?

what say you guys?

I still think the feds would step in and say the guy would be acting as an FFL without such a license. it might take a supreme court ruling on this one.

I also think that if the chicago ban that was upheld there is upheld in the supreme court, then it is apparent federal law does not supersede state law and these states would have a case against the feds. they can't have it all. either states follow the feds rules which currently says no bans, or feds have to grant the states rules.

Montana is already in the process of doing this. It is not at the supreme court (yet) but a lawsuit has been filed in a federal court in order to validate it.