If the anti-gunners can’t erase our right to keep and bear arms from the Constitution, they can certainly try to make gun ownership as burdensome and expensive as possible. California is leading the way in those efforts, with some localities charging four figures to apply for a concealed carry licenses and cities like San Jose requiring gun owners purchase a liability insurance policy and fork over an annual fee to a third-party “violence prevention group” before they can exercise their Second Amendment rights.
The excessive fees and unconstitutional mandates are already the subject of court challenges in California, but other states are now looking to block gun control activists and anti-gun politicians from spreading these infringements. This week the Ohio House adopted a bill prohibiting localities or the state from mandating gun owners carry a liability insurance policy before keeping or bearing arms, while rejecting an amendment that would have prohibited local law enforcement from enforcing or participating “in any way in the enforcement of any federal acts, executive orders, administrative orders, rules, regulations, statutes, or ordinances regarding firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition.”
The idea was first introduced to the Ohio House through H.B. 51, which cleared its committee but was never brought to the floor for an outright vote following firm opposition from Ohio’s prosecutors and police.
Throughout its legislative journey, local law enforcement argued that SAPA’s proposed rules and strict penalties would create a chilling effect that would, in effect, entirely dissuade Ohio’s state and local law enforcement agencies from partaking in both local-federal task forces and joint investigations that deal with federal gun laws.
Bill backers contended that SAPA would allow local law enforcement to partake in those activities as long as the federal gun regulation was in some way related to an underlying crime. But, pushes from prosecutors and various lawmakers to get an official clarification in writing were fruitless.
“The issue for us is that because it’s not clear, we’ve got to risk this lawsuit,” Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association Executive Director Lou Tobin told this outlet in December 2023. “(In order) to tell local law enforcement that they can cooperate, we’ve got to risk this lawsuit, and we just don’t know. And so the prosecutors’ advice is going to have to be just to err on the side of caution.”
While SB 58 was approved by a 61-27 vote, the vote to add the Second Amendment Preservation Act failed by almost the same margin; 56-35, with multiple Republicans joining every Democrat in opposing the measure.
Some lawmakers said they supported the idea at the heart of SAPA, but were concerned about the details of the legislation and cautioned that its inclusion put the passage of SB 58 into doubt. Even if the House had adopted the amendment, the Senate would have had to concur, and according to one representative, the amendment was a non-starter.
The amendment ultimately failed on the back of arguments made by Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, who at one time was a proponent of SAPA but urged his colleagues Wednesday to vote against the amendment based on the fact that the Senate would not have any time to actually vet it.
“I contacted the Senate repeatedly today … and got a clear and unequivocal statement from their policy director, from the member of their current leadership and from the president himself, that (they) are not going to consider this bill at all if this amendment goes into it,” said Seitz.
Seitz, the outgoing majority floor leader, also questioned why SAPA was never given the simple clarifying amendment it needed to attract majority support.
It’s a reasonable question to ask, especially given the optics of the legislation. Republicans are generally the party of law and order, so the argument that SAPA would prevent local law enforcement from working with the feds on any investigation where firearms might be involved makes some conservatives skittish.
Senate President Matt Huffman, for instance, told reporters ahead of the House vote that “when we have serious crimes, when we have murders and gang activity, especially with our immigration issues right now, that removes the ability to have folks come in and take care of that, I think we have to have a lot of concern.”
The good news for SAPA supporters is that, with that clarifying language attached it sounds like the measure stands a pretty good chance of success next year. And the good news for all gun owners in Ohio is that once Gov. Mike DeWine signs SB 58 into law, they won’t have to worry about anti-gun mayors and city council members in cities like Columbus, Cleveland, and Cincinnati from trying to tie the exercise of their Second Amendment rights to a valid insurance policy.
Read the full article here
