Recordpub.com - Gun law change draws fire Proposal would ease self-defense rules in Ohio

By Mike Hixenbaugh

Record-Courier staff writer

A proposal that seeks to change Ohio's policy regarding self-defense has a few anti-gun organizations up in arms.

Currently in Ohio, if you shoot an intruder in your home, by law you must prove self-defense to avoid charges.

State Sen. Steve Buehrer wants to change that. If someone threatens you and you kill them, Buehrer said police could investigate and prosecute. In order to avoid prison time and lawsuits, you would be forced to prove your life was in implicit danger - a policy that the senator said "is outrageous."

"People want to feel comfortable in their homes and in their communities," said Buehrer, a Republican from Delta. "This is about allowing people to take the necessary steps in a potentially life-threatening situation."

Buehrer hopes to pass a bill similar to laws in 19 other states, which give residents an automatic right to attack when feeling threatened. Anyone who claimed self-defense would be shielded from charges in criminal and civil courts, barring overwhelming evidence against them.

"When someone commits an act of self-defense, they can have civil charges brought against them by the attacker," Buehrer said. "That leads to thousands of dollars in court costs for innocent people. We want to end that."

Supporters refer to the bill as the "Castle Doctrine," but it is not limited to in-home altercations. Anyone who claims self-defense anywhere -- from personal cars to public venues -- would be protected by the law.

The National Rifle Association quickly pledged support for the bill, as did several other gun-rights activists.

However, resistance has come from the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence, along with other advocacy groups that candidly refer to the bill as the "Shoot First Law." Officials from the OCAGV believe the bill gives people more freedom to shoot each other, a measure that would be "a step backward in civility."

"We're not against self-defense like gun lobbyists will say," said Toby Hoover, OCAGV Executive Director. "They are telling people, 'Thanks to this bill, when someone breaks into your home and rapes your wife and your daughter, you will now, for the first time, have a right to defend your family.'

"But it's nonsense. You already have that right. They are playing on people's fears in order to gain support. This is just a free pass to kill without thinking."

The Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association has declared opposition to the bill. Portage County Prosecutor Victor Viguicci isn't sure, but at first glance the proposal seems too broad, he said.

"Something like this comes up every year," Viguicci said. "But usually they don't seek this broad of coverage. I'd have to research it more, but it seems like too much."

Members of the Buckeye Firearms Association disagree with his preliminary assessment. The group has worked closely with legislators to push for the so-called right-to-shoot bill, although the organization's chairman, Jim Irvine, said the law has little to do with firearms.

"This isn't about guns, it's about self-defense," Irvine said. "If someone attacks you and brutally tries to kill you or rape your wife, do you not have the right to defend your family? If you do defend your life, should you be treated differently than someone else who suffers some other crime?

"In school, we all learned that you are innocent until proven guilty. This bill makes that a reality."

Still, with the growing number of personal gun owners, there are legitimate fears about abuses of the law, Hoover said. Just three years after concealed weapons were legalized in Ohio, more than 87,000 Ohioans have been issued carrying concealed weapon permits. In Portage County alone, there are more than 620 active CCW permits, according to the sheriff's department.

For that reason, local law enforcement officials tend to side with Hoover, who believes the bill creates more opportunity for reckless gun use.

"And besides, it's not like we have a whole bunch of people sitting in jail because they tried to defend themselves," Hoover said.

Regardless of whether the bill clears committee, it seems gun advocates and anti-violence groups will never see eye-to-eye on the issue.

"People like Toby Hoover think you shouldn't defend yourself - that if you're attacked, you should just die," Irvine said. "Plain and simple, they are against self-defense."

It's a claim that Hoover said is, "a blatant manipulation of the facts."

As is the case with any rhetoric that supports the proposed bill, she said.

Committees in both the House and Senate are in the process of evaluating the legislation, but early indicators suggest that the bill is garnering support in both houses.

Posted by mg47s July 25, 2007

well said desertlion and the woman who has family serving our country and the other thought out and rational comments you folks have made--you reinforce my desire to continue to believe in a strong, sensible America. Although it does get hard at times.
Someone mentioned police chiefs _ In my past I attended many conferences and seminars with many police chiefs from across Ohio and surrounding states. It may surprise some people that a majority of those chiefs personally support the citizens right to bear arms. Furthermore a majority of those chiefs also were very critical of this countrys drug laws as well.
Many law enforcement persons are quie comfortable with a less restrictive regulation bound and more live and let live social order. They believe that many human and social problems that are presently defined as criminality are just that social or human problems that are best addressed and ressolved in other than the law enforcement arena. To press these "problems" into "crime" definitions is to tax and stretch an already over used govt. agency beyond its ability and resources.

Part of the problem is a practical one - Few if any law enforcement leadership will say these things publically--- they want to keep their jobs. The politicians use these areas to keep people fearful and fund their own agendas. And to fund the police budgets,
so unfortunately some of the public police posturing is self serving as well.

There are also as desert Lion points out, powerful people in the country who are now called liberal?? that spend a great deal of money and power to get the govt. to enforce and impose their preferences and beliefs on others. Guns and drugs are two of the topics that they manufacture much misunderstanding on to this end and they have the money and power to keep their messages on these matters in the media and thus in the minds of many.

Bless you all that continue to think and weigh matters with the God given sense and abilities that seem so easily munipulated these days.

I pray for peace and for my enemies and I keep loaded weapons ready for use -- In this I find no hypocrisy --
-what you think about that... like clark cable said in Gone with the wind " frankly my dear I dont give a damn"...

Posted by DesertLion July 25, 2007

A few items for Mike Hixenbaugh to research and, hopefully, use to correct the record.

1. It is not only supporters of the bill who call it "The Castle Doctrine". The doctrine comes from the English common law doctrine that says, in short, "A man's home is his castle." Although opponents like to villify guns in general and this law in particular calling it the "Shoot First" law or "Shoot the Avon Lady" law, the premise is that any people who are in a place they have a legal right to be also have a right to defend themselves. Deadly force is only an option for defense when it would otherwise be authorized.

2. "Local law enforcement" does indeed support this law. No, the politically appointed chiefs of police in certain parts of the state don't support anything that makes it harder for them to blame guns for crime. However, if you go to most places in Ohio, you will find that the cop on the street understands the difference between a gun and a criminal with a gun, and knows which of those cause a problem. Cops don't fear law abiding citizens whether they have guns or not. The bill is also supported by the Law Enforcement Association of America, the Fraternal Order of Police, and most career officers.

3. There is no such group of people that can be appropriately called "Officials from the OCAGV" - there is Toby Hoover and funding support from the anti-gun Joyce Foundation and from George Soros. Period. If you don't believe that, try to get a list of members or officers from OCAGV. You won't get such names, or even a number. Try to interview anyone in the organization other than Toby Hoover. Or try to get even one name of someone in the organization other than the executive director or her immediate paid staff.

4. You got a nice quote from Victor Viguicci, but to apply his personal opinion as representing that of the whole Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association is inaccurate. Victor has opposed every aspect of the Ohio concealed carry reform. The legal portion of my concealed carry course it taught by an active prosecuting attorney. For balance, perhaps you should also include a quote from Attorney General Marc Dann.

5. Although there may be a growing number of gun owners, the number far exceeds the number of Concealed Handgun Licenses issued by Ohio counties. As of the end of March 2007, the latest statistics currently available, 92,121 licenses have been issued. Although some of the license holders have purchased guns, most of them were already gun owners before they went through the process to get a license to carry concealed, and many more who still have guns in the home.

The Castle Doctrine reinforces the principle that defense of self and others is a right and that criminals should not use the legal system to continue to abuse their vicitms through lawsuits for injuries received as a direct result of their own illegal actions.