Ohio House "Castle Doctrine" Hearings Trudge On
Submitted by Jerid on Thu, 12/13/2007 - 3:28pm.
Interesting piece from "ThisWeek" outlinging some of the hearings going on in the Ohio House regarding introduction of the "Castle Doctrine" to the Ohio Revised Code.
I've written about the doctrine in the past. I still feel that if done responsibly - not giving gun owners carte blanche to shoot upon sight whenever and wherever they want - that this change in Ohio liabilities could be a positive. And, well, that's generally at odds with most folks in the party.
A 27-year-old northeast Ohio man told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Criminal Justice on Dec. 5 that, more than six years after a justified shooting in self-defense, he is still in court awaiting a civil trial filed by the man he shot.
"My life is literally on hold and has been for seven years," he said. "I cannot own property, or establish a personal savings, as I fear for the consequences that lie ahead."
After a shooting Sept. 17, 2001, when Cundiff and his girlfriend were assaulted while camping, Cundiff himself was arrested and charged criminally. Cundiff said he was tempted by a plea bargain, exchanging a guilty plea for a six-month sentence, but he girded himself and went to trial.
"Imagine my terrible choice," he said. "I could go to trial, risk seven years in prison, spend thousands of dollars, and rely on the jury, knowing full well I was innocent, or I could take the easier, guaranteed deal that would allow me to avoid a long prison term. I chose the jury route, but it was a terrible gamble with my life."
In the more than five years since he was acquitted on criminal charges, Cundiff said, the only significant action in the civil suit was a successful effort by Cundiff's insurance company to obtain a ruling that his insurance did not have to pay any of his expenses, on the grounds that the shooting was deliberate.
Hmmmm. The castle doctrine usually nullifies criminal and civil liability for use of a deadly weapon in defense when someone intrudes upon your home. Other, more expansive, versions of the doctrine allow use of a weapon for other areas which can be considered a "home" to some (cars, RV's, tents, etc.).
In this example at the Ohio House I'm a little concerned that someone would take a firearm with them while camping. Making a bit of a leap, if they were in federal, or even state lands, there's a good chance that the weapon was prohibited by law. But regardless, this is the exact type of expansive reading of the castle doctrine I have a hard time supporting. I think folks should be allowed to use a weapon without fear of liability to defend their own home, but once you start throwing in tents, and trailers, and campsites, and the whole yahoo in, you run into some problems where you can use a gun virtually anywhere without recourse.
OTHER THOUGHTS ON THE CONCEAL/CARRY ISSUE....
Submitted by ARMED FATHER on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 10:38am.
PASSING THE CASTLE DOCTRINE IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION FOR OHIO'S LAWFULLY ARMED CITIZENS. AND AS I SAID PREVIOUSLY, THERE ARE STILL ALOT OF UNANSWERED QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW LAWMAKERS ARE GOING TO EFFECT THE TRAVELS OF THE CCW CARRIER WHILE DRIVING OR RIDING PAST CERTAIN FORBIDDEN ZONES. WHILE I TOTALLY AGREE THAT GUNS DO NOT BELONG IN SCHOOLS, I DON'T THINK A CCW LICENSE CARRIER TRAVELING PAST THE SCHOOL ZONE SHOULD BE PENALIZED. I THINK THE PENALTY SHOULD APPLY HOWEVER, TO THE CCW LICENSE CARRIER WHO ENTERS THE SCHOOL PROPERTY ARMED.
I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING BEHIND DRUG FREE SCHOOL ZONES, AND I SUPPORT THESE EFFORTS WHOLE HEARTEDLY. BUT IF I'M NOT A DRUG DEALER. I'M CARRYING A LOADED CONCEALED FIREARM FOR MY OWN PROTECTION WHILE IN A MOTOR VEHICLE, TRAVELING PAST A SCHOOL ZONE AND NOT ENTERING THE SCHOOL'S PROPERTY, I SHOULDN'T BE PENALIZED FOR DOING SO.
ALSO, THE SIGNS WE ALL SEE THAT SAY, "NO FIREARMS ON THESE PREMISES"? I BELIEVE THESE SIGNS ARE A DETERENT TO ARMED ROBBERIES AND POSSIBLY MURDERS OF STORE CLERKS, AND BUSINESS OWNERS. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT I READ SOMEWHERE THAT THE PENALTY FOR CARRYING A FIREARM ONTO POSTED GUN PROHIBITING PREMISES IS A TRESPASSING CHARGE. HOWEVER, I ALSO READ SOMEWHERE THAT A MAN WAS IN A GROCERY STORE AND REACHED UP ON A HIGH SHELF TO RETRIEVE AN ITEM...THIS STORE WAS NOT POSTED AS BEING FIREARM PROHIBITING...WHEN A WOMAN DISCOVERED HE WAS CARRYING A FIREARM IN HIS WAISTBAND. THE LADY GRABBED HER CELL PHONE AND CALLED THE POLICE. THE MAN WAS CHARGED WITH INDUCING PANIC! I READ THIS STORY ON A WEBSITE BLOG SOMEWHERE?
THE WRITING OF FUTURE GUN LAWS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE CLEAR AND CONCISE AS TO THE LEGALITIES THAT LOCAL JURISTICTIONS CAN EVOKE ON ARMED CITIZENS. TOO MANY TIMES, OUR RIGHTS GET TRAMPLED IN A MESS OF NEEDLESS AND EXPENSIVE COURTROOM PROSECUTIONS AGAINST ARMED CITIZENS. THE EXAMPLE OF A MAN SHOPPING FOR GROCERIES WHILE CCW IS JUST ONE OF MANY YET TO FOLLOW I'M SURE.
OHIOANS THAT DON'T CARRY, OR ARE AFRAID OF FIREARMS SHOULD GET EDUCATED! SOMEDAY, THEY MAY BE GLAD A CCW CARRIER IS AVAILABLE TO SAVE THEIR LIVES IN THE EVENT OF A VIOLENT CRIME. QUIT MAKING CCW LICENSE HOLDERS OUT TO BE CRIMINALS BEFORE THEY'VE COMMITTED A CRIME FOR GOD'S SAKE!
I'M A LOVING AND CARING HUSBAND AND FATHER WHO HAS COME TO THE REALAZATION THAT I'M NOT 25 YEARS OLD ANYMORE. I CAN'T DUKE IT OUT WITH THESE YOUNG THUGS ANYMORE. AND I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO RUN FROM THEM EITHER! BRAZEN AND BOLD ARE THEY TO ATTACK SOMEONE THEY FEEL IS WEAKER TO THEM. THINK AGAIN!!! HOPEFULLY,THIS BILL WILL BE LAW, AND I FOR ONE WILL NO LONGER BE VICTIMIZED BY VIOLENT CRIMES AGAINST MY FAMILY IN THE FUTURE.
THE LAST THING I EVER WANT TO HAVE TO DO IS SHOOT MY FIREARM IN DEFENSE. LIFE IS PRECIOUS! MY WIFE'S LIFE, MY DAUGHTER'S LIFE, MY SON'S LIFE, AND MY LIFE! AS ARE THE LIVES OF MY EXTENDED FAMILY. BUT BEFORE I LET SOME LOW LIFE CRIMINAL ATTEMPT TO SERIOUSLY HARM, OR TAKE THE LIFE OF A LOVED ONE. I WILL NOT HESITATE TO PULL THE TRIGGER, EVER! AND I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GO TO JAIL AND ALIENATE MY LOVED ONES FOR IT. IT'S TIME TO STOP VIOLENT CRIMINALS FROM TAKING MORE LIVES CONCERNING THEIR ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES.
WAKE UP AMERICA!
Castle Doctrine
Submitted by euclid44 on Sun, 05/18/2008 - 12:41pm.
The Senate recently passed Senate Bill #184 sponsored by Sen. Buehren. It is intended to bring the Castle Doctrine to Ohio...Hopefully the House will follow up and pass this act as have Florida and other statea... The law abiding citizen needs to have the ability to protect themselves and their families both at home and while in their car without fear of expensive legal action initiated by the criminal.
ccw and Castle
Submitted by euclid44 on Thu, 05/29/2008 - 8:09am.
it is truly unfortunate that the ccw law prohibits carrying a gun in parks.... Just yesterday a lady attcked in the Cleveland area died as a result of an attack ...... to the best of my knowledge folks with ccw permits have not been a problem .... while criminals area problem and seem to be going to areas where they know no one will have a gun..... hmmm, are they smarter than our lawmakers. As for Castle..... please pass the most expansive law possible....
GUNS!!! YEAH!!!
Submitted by kJk on Thu, 05/29/2008 - 9:52am.
WHO FINDS IT COMFORTING THAT SOMEONE WHO TYPES IN ALL CAPS IS PASSIONATE ABOUT CARRYING GUNS?!!! DON'T ALL SPEAK AT ONCE.
Concealed Weapons permits are wrong....
Submitted by Schmennis on Thu, 05/29/2008 - 4:45pm.
You either have a license OR YOU DON'T. Which is it?
It is not right for the local and state government to issue permits to carry concealed weapons, then LIMIT where it can be carried. Schools YES, firearms should not be near schools and court houses churches and bars, but PARKS???
THE ONLY reason I can think of to carry a gun would be protection. So what is the point of issuing a permit if my firearm has to be locked in my car?
"ALSO, THE SIGNS WE ALL SEE THAT SAY, "NO FIREARMS ON THESE PREMISES"? I BELIEVE THESE SIGNS ARE A DETERENT TO ARMED ROBBERIES AND POSSIBLY MURDERS OF STORE CLERKS, AND BUSINESS OWNERS."
Anyone that thinks a sign is going to stop a criminal from robbing someone is to liberal to be defending gun rights.
Is that why banks get robbed because there is a sign that says, "Insured by the FDIC protects the first $100000 of deposits..." So speed limit signs must prevent speed fatalities, or "No alcohol sold to minors" keeps kids from drinking, Ridiculous suggestion.
Once again, as a former Deputy when a criminal sees a sign of no firearms, THAT goes high on his list OF THE FIRST PLACE THEY WILL ROB!
No guns = No defense. Ask Florida or Texas.
Responsible gun owners make law enforcement EASIER.....responsible gun owners, protect themselves and deter crime...why would I rob a 7-11 WHEN I DON'T KNOW WHO THE HECK HAS A GUN???? Little o' granny over there could be packin' heat.
Gun ownership is also GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY. Legal gun ownership involves, permits, REVENUE to the county (set by the Sheriff) for issuing permit and can include or require classes given by experienced law enforcement on the use of "deadly force." (more revenue) Not to mention FINES for non-compliance.
Purchasing firearms, holsters, belts, magazines, lock boxes, trigger locks, ammunition, firing range membership all create needed JOBS!!!! and fuel the stalled firearm industry. Which includes, coal, steel, polymers, transportation, fuel, local jobs for sporting goods stores.
Ammunition production which includes, chemists, cartridge re-loaders, shipping involves advance trained Hazmat truck drivers.
Like all things, guns in the right hands can be good or in the wrong hands can be bad, but I would rather have 5 responsible concealed weapons holders in a bank vs. 1 bad person with an illegal gun in their possession, when the scream goes out "EVERYONE GET DOWN!"
With all the school shootings, I would prefer armed teachers.
In universities, I would prefer armed students AGAINST mentally deranged student or an armed clerk at the Lane Bryant.
Firearms in the right hands are not bad.
Re: Ohio House "Castle Doctrine" Hearings Trudge On
"In this example at the Ohio House I'm a little concerned that someone would take a firearm with them while camping." "I think folks should be allowed to use a weapon without fear of liability to defend their own home, but once you start throwing in tents, and trailers, and campsites, and the whole yahoo in, you run into some problems where you can use a gun virtually anywhere without recourse.
YOUR KIDDING RIGHT? HAVE YOU BEEN CAMPING LATELY? CAMPGROUNDS CAN BE SOME OF THE MOST DANGEROUS PLACES TO CALL "HOME" FOR THE NIGHT.
I'VE LEARNED ALONG TIME AGO TO THINK OF ALL THE THINGS THAT CAN GO WRONG, AND PLAN ACCORDINGLY! IF YOUR TRAVELING IN YOUR CAR OUT OF STATE, DON'T YOU STOP IN REST AREAS, GAS STATIONS, TRUCK STOPS, MOTELS, ETC...? WHY IS CAMPING ANY DIFFERENT? HOME IS WHERE YOU LAY YOUR HEAD MY FRIEND. AND I KNOW I WOULD SLEEP ALOT BETTER IN A "TENT" IF NEED BE; WHILE I HAVE A LEGALLY OBTAINED CONCEALED AND "LOADED" FIREARM FIRMLY ATTACHED TO MY PJ'S!
GENERALLY SPEAKING...MY EXPERIENCES IN MY 42 YEARS, IS THAT PEOPLE HAVE BECOME INCREASINGLY MORE BRAZEN AND BOLD IN THEIR CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES. AND I REFUSE TO BE THAT VICTIM ANYMORE. I'VE BEEN THREATENED, VANDALIZED, AND PHYSICALLY ATTACKED IN THE PAST. IT'S TIME FOR THE CRIMINALS START ASKING THEMSELVES IF I'M ARMED AND DANGEROUS. AND IF THE RISK OF THEIR VIOLENCE AGAINST ME AND MY OWN IS WORTH DIEING FOR?
I ALREADY HAVE ENOUGH PLACES AS A LAW-ABIDING CITIZEN; THAT I CAN'T CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM SUCH AS SCHOOLS, BARS, CHURCHES, GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS, ETC...COUNTLESS SMALL BUSINESSES AND STORES. AND STRANGELY ENOUGH, MOST OF THESE PLACES ARE WHERE VIOLENCE BEGINS?
NEXT THEY'LL BE TELLING US THAT WE NEED TO CARRY A MAP OF ALL THE PLACES WE CAN'T CARRY A CONCEALED FIREARM... SO WHEN I'M CCW, AND TRAVELING TO A DOCTOR'S APPT... IN THE SUBURBS... AND I GET STOPPED BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR SOME TYPE OF TRAFFIC VIOLATION... THAT I WASN'T STOPPED WITHIN 1000 FT OF SOME SCHOOL? HOW THE HELL AM I SUPPOSED TO KNOW THERES A SCHOOL AROUND THE BLOCK FROM WHERE I GOT STOPPED? I MAY LIVE 40 MILES AWAY FROM THIS AREA? I DON'T KNOW WHERE EVERY PRESCHOOL, ELEMENTARY, JR. HIGH, OR HIGH SCHOOL HOUSE IS IN OHIO?
GOOD QUESTION HUH?
LET'S NOT DABBLE OVER CCW PLACES WE "PREFER" TO CALL HOME. LET'S JUST AGREE THAT WE SHOULD AS OHIOANS, BE AFFORDED THE RIGHT TO PROTECT OURSELVES WHEN WE ARE THERE.
DEVOTED HUSBAND, AND FATHER OF TWO CHILDREN, AND TWO PISTOLS.