From: lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Text of Ohio House Bill 709
Summary: analysis
Keywords: gun storage, children
Date: 12 Apr 92 03:40:59 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Ideology Busters, Inc.

In article <1992Apr12.033611.15126@cbnews.cb.att.com>, lvc@cbnews.cb.att.com (Larry Cipriani) writes:

Well, my worst fears didn't come true.  While this bill has good intentions
there are some technical flaws in it.  After all, the author is known as a
gun control advocate ...

> Sec. 2923.211.  (A) No person, who knows, or reasonably should know that a
> child is likely to gain access to the loaded firearm without the permission

"Loaded firearm" ?!?  Through out this bill the term "loaded firearm" appears.
In every instance, it would be an improvement to drop the word "loaded."

> of the parent, guardian, or custodian of the child, shall store or leave a
> loaded firearm on premises under his control in a manner that results in a

There it is again, "loaded firearm."  Just what constitutes "loaded" in
Ohio law ?  If a semi-auto doesn't have a magazine but one is nearby and
filled does that count as loaded, analagously with a revolver ...

> child obtaining the loaded firearm without the permission of the parent,

It's okay if someone let' my child touch their unloaded firearm if I
don't give my permission ?  No way !

> (2) A person who secures a loaded firearm with a trigger lock or stores or

All manufacturers of trigger locks recommend you do not put it on a loaded
weapon!

> leaves a loaded firearm in a securely locked box or container, in a
> location that a reasonable person would believe to be secure;

So at least you can claim you tried to keep the firearm away from the
child.

> (3) A person whose loaded firearm is obtained by a child as a result of an
> unlawful entry by any person onto the premises on which the loaded firearm
> was stored or kept;

What if it's stolen from a vehicle ?

> (4) An officer, agent, or employee of this state, another state, or the
> United States or a law enforcement officer when a child obtains possession
> of the officer's, agent's, or employee's loaded firearm during or
> incidental to the performance of the officer's, agent's, or employee's
> official duties.

If a good guy needs help the child can have the loaded firearm ...

Hmm ..  What if a my child is at my neighbors home, and someone breaks in to
that home while my child is there ?  If my child gets my neighbors firearm
[so it's without my permission] for the purpose of defending the people there,
my neighbor shouldn't be in violation of this law !

> (C) If a person is accidentally shot by another member of his family who is
> a child as a result of a violation of division (A) of this section by a
> member of the family of the child, no person shall be arrested for the
> violation of this section until at least seven days after the violation
> occurs.

I guess "justice" can wait for the tears to stop ...

> (1) If the violation does not result in a child possessing or exhibiting
> the loaded firearm in a public place, possessing or exhibiting the loaded
> firearm in a careless or threatening manner, or using the firearm to cause
> physical harm or death to himself or another person, the violation is a
> misdemeanor of the third degree.

If a child gets an unloaded firearm what's to stop him from getting ammo
for it ?  Nothing a few older friends can't help with ...  The next two
sections have the same flaw.

> Sec. 2923.212 (A) No person who sells or transfers firearms at retail shall
> fail to do either of the following:

This doesn't bother me very much, but I don't like it a whole lot either
[I might become and FFL one of these days ...]  How do I prove that my
customers receive the notification ?

> (1) Post in a conspicuous place ..
> 
> (2) Give to each person who purchases a firearm ...

> Section 2.  The Department of Education shall develop a proposed course of
> study covering firearms safety for use in all public elementary and
> secondary schools in this state.

As long as it isn't anti-gun irrationality good, I'm all for it!

> The Department of Taxation shall recommend to the Department of Education
> a plan for an increased tax on firearms to provide funds to cover the cost
> of the course.

This could be a big problem.  If the increased tax on firearms is simply a
one time sales tax collected by dealers that's one thing, and is much less
offensive than collecting taxes based on gun ownership, permits, licenses,
etc.  If those are what we end up with then we're screwed royally.

Or, why not just make it funded out of the general fund.  After all it's
not for the benefit of gun owners, it's for the benefit of the public so
the public should pay for it.

> No later than January 1, 1993, the Department of Education shall submit
> to both houses of the General Assembly the proposed course of study and
> proposed legislation for increasing the tax on firearms and for implementing
> the course in all public elementary and secondary schools in this state.

At least we'll have a chance to comment on the course of study and proposed
firearms tax.  If gun buyers/owners are going to have to pay for this course
of study it better not be offensive nor too expensive to us!
-- 
Larry Cipriani, att!cbvox1!lvc or lvc@cbvox1.att.com
"An unarmed people are slaves, or subject to slavery
at any moment." -- Huey P. Newton.