« More on SWAT shooting in Atlanta | Main | Politics and whatnot »
Negotiations in Ohio
The Columbus Dispatch reports on negotiations over gun legislation in Ohio.
It sounds as if statewide pre-emption is the issue, and the Highway Patrol wanted, in exchange, a requirement that CCW permittees carry openly while in vehicles. Highway Patrol agreed instead to an increased penalty for failure to inform an officer, during a traffic stop, that the permittee has a firearm.
Does seem a tempest in a teapot, since I doubt there has ever been a case, anywhere in the US, of a permittee drawing on an officer, let alone doing so in a traffic stop. Fugitive felons do that, but fearing that someone (already checked out and found to have no significant criminal record) might murder an officer to prevent getting three points on his driving record is a bit much.
3 Comments | Leave a comment
Well, they will take what they can get. The only reason they got this was becayse Taft threatened to veto it otherwise. With the new governor, I think the state patrol is essentially out of luck.
Also, what's the point of officer notification? Officers shouls always assume there is a risk in stopping a vehicle. A permit holder is unlikely to be a risk. A felon is not going to tell the officer he is armed and in fact could not be found guilty for not informing, as requiring such violates the officers right against self incrimination.
About two years ago, I had to dig around for an instance of a traffic stop which resulted in the arrestee "drawing" on the officer.
I was told that there was exactly ONE incident in the entire USA--and the permit-holder was an ex-cop.
IIRC it was Connecticut or Vermont--
Actually, the current law requires license holders to carry a handgun in one of two ways while in a vehicle: (1) in a holster on the person, in plain sight, or (2) in a locked box, e.g., glove box. These requirements were placed in the current law at the request of the State Patrol. The proposed reform legislation seeks to eliminate the open carry in vehicle requirement. It appears the State Patrol will not oppose the change in vehicle carry requirements in exchange for a heightened penalty for failure to inform.