Ohio Castle Doctrine Introduced

This is a discussion on Ohio Castle Doctrine Introduced within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; From the Ohioans For Concealed Carry website: Castle Doctrine Introduced On June 14, both bodies of the Ohio General Assembly introduced necessary legislative bills that ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17

Thread: Ohio Castle Doctrine Introduced

  1. #1
    Member Array MeanStreaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    35

    Ohio Castle Doctrine Introduced

    From the Ohioans For Concealed Carry website:
    Castle Doctrine Introduced

    On June 14, both bodies of the Ohio General Assembly introduced necessary legislative bills that clarify self-defense laws and when it is justified for someone to protect their life or the lives of others.

    Senator Steve Buehrer has put forth Senate Bill 184 and Representative Lynn Wachtmann has introduced House Bill 264. Both aim to bring a version of the nationally known Castle Doctrine to Ohio that self-defense rights activists have long worked towards. You may recall that very similar "Stand Your Ground" legislation was in the Ohio Assembly last year before the calendar expired and it was not moved upon.

    The Castle Doctrine as introduced would bring two very important and necessary clarifications to Ohio law:

    First, it states that the victim of a violent attack that was forced to defend himself/herself with justified means can not be pursued in civil court for any injuries suffered by the violent attacker. HB264 as written says:

    A person who properly establishes the affirmative defense of self-defense or defense of another is not liable in damages to any person in a tort action for injury, death, or loss to person or property allegedly caused by the person while acting in self-defense or defense of another.
    This is a long overdue attempt to legislate common sense in saying that someone who is about to kill or cause grave bodily harm can not sue for damages if they are injured while being stopped.

    Second, both bills recognize a victim's right to self-defense if a violent attacker is forcibly breaking into your home or is about to cause death or serious injury anywhere the intended victim has a right to be. HB264 as written says:

    Every person accused of an offense is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and the burden of proof for all elements of the offense is upon the prosecution. The burden of going forward with the evidence of an affirmative defense, and the burden of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, for an affirmative defense, is upon the accused. If the accused raises self-defense or defense of another as an affirmative defense and the accused or the person defended by the accused was suffering or was about to suffer an offense of violence that is a felony or was suffering or was about to suffer a forcible trespass upon the home of the accused or the home of the person defended by the accused, there is a rebuttable presumption that the accused acted properly in self-defense or in defense of the person defended by the accused.
    For too long, Ohio's judicial system has ignored the axiom of "innocent until proven guilty" and placed the burden of proof of justifiable self-defense on the attack victim that was forced to stop a would-be murderer. HB264 and SB184 will bring Ohio law back in line with a sensible understanding of victim's rights.

    Florida passed the first legislation of this kind in 2005 and anti-self-defense zealots immediately attacked the law by labeling it as a "Shoot First" law. However, they have been proven wrong once again as no state with Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground provisions has turned into the Wild West atmosphere that they continually (and incorrectly) predict. You would think they would try a different tactic after failing for so long.

    OFCC Vice President Bryan Torok comments, "This legislation rolls back years of liberal court precedents where judges in revising law from the bench, have eroded law abiding citizens right of self defense. Castle Doctrine is long overdue in Ohio and we will continue to fight for it as we have for many years."

    "At the end of the day what we're trying to do is make sure that people feel safer in their home, safer in their community, and take the affirmative steps necessary to protect themselves and their families," said sponsoring Sen. Steve Buehrer (R-Delta).

    Ohioans For Concealed Carry asks our members and supporters to please contact their representatives in Columbus in support of HB264 and SB184. It is very important for our voices to be heard. Ohio law needs to be changed so that the burden of proof in our courts is where it should be, on the violent attacker, and not on the hands of a law-abiding citizen that was forced to defend themselves with a knife or a rock on the ground.

    Remember that this is not a "gun bill". Any opposition to this legislation needs to be reminded that they are against self-defense and the common sense rights of their constituents to protect their family.
    Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.
    --Thomas Paine

    Learn how Project Appleseed Marksmanship and Heritage events support freedom.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array Smith&Wessonfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    508
    What do those new bills do that this law ORC 2305.40 does not already do?

  4. #3
    Member Array MeanStreaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    35
    Well, I'm not a lawyer, but the biggest difference that jumps out after one read is that the law you cited only applies while someone is in the home. These new bills include language to protect you anywhere where there "was suffering or was about to suffer an offense of violence that is a felony."

    Also, the old affirmative defense laws in Ohio placed all burden of proof on the victim that had to defend himself. The new bills clearly define from the onset that certain common sense definitions are put in place for when an injured criminal can't sue the victim that had to stop him:

    (B) For purposes of division (A) of this section, the affirmative defense of self-defense or defense of another is properly established when any of the following occurs:

    (1) The prosecuting attorney declines to charge the person or moves to dismiss the charge because the prosecuting attorney believes that the person acted in self-defense or defense of another.

    (2) The grand jury finds that the person acted in self-defense or defense of another.

    (3) The person is acquitted after trial because the court or jury finds that the person acted in self-defense or defense of another.
    Let me look into it further and come back.
    Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.
    --Thomas Paine

    Learn how Project Appleseed Marksmanship and Heritage events support freedom.

  5. #4
    Senior Member Array Smith&Wessonfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    508
    Thanks. I love it when we are on the offensive!

  6. #5
    1943 - 2009
    Array Captain Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    10,371
    Good luck, Ohio! I'm rooting for ya!

    Our do-nothing-but-tax-the-citizens legislature in Montana killed Castle Doctrine bills in 2005 and again in 2007. Now we have to wait until 2009!


    When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
    And the women come out to cut up what remains,
    Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
    And go to your God like a soldier.

    Rudyard Kipling


    Terry

  7. #6
    Moderator
    Array buckeye .45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    7,659
    Thats good, apparently between the two houses there were about 50 co-sponsors, and the governor supports it. Here is what the Enquirer ran about it today, trying to say that is loosened "gun control" laws, even though it is really a self defense issue.

    COLUMBUS - Trying to build on success that began in Florida and spread to 17 other states, the National Rifle Association started a push in Ohio on Wednesday that would give people more authority to use deadly force to defend themselves both in and outside their homes.

    People who injure or kill an attacker in self defense no longer would shoulder the burden to prove their actions were justifiable under a bill introduced Wednesday by Republican lawmakers. The proposal also would protect people who justifiably kill someone in self defense from civil lawsuits that could require them to pay damages.

    The first similar law passed in Florida in 2005, and Ohio is one of 16 states where the NRA is pushing the legislation. The NRA also backed an Ohio law that enabled concealed carry permits for guns.

    The influential gun-rights organization is methodically changing what it sees as laws that give undeserved protection to criminals and place the burden of proof on innocent victims.

    DOUBTS RAISED

    Gun-control advocates argue the bill proposes a solution for a nonexistent problem. And they have said the laws hinge on a subjective interpretation of when a person may feel threatened, potentially leading to overreactions and fatal escalations to conflicts that could be defused by retreating.

    The Ohio bill - which was introduced with roughly 50 co-sponsors in the House and Senate, including some Democrats - provides the presumption that a person "acted properly in self defense" if the person "was suffering or was about to suffer an offense of violence that was a felony."

    "At the end of the day, what we're trying to do is make sure that people feel safer in their home, safer in their community, and take the affirmative steps necessary to protect themselves and their families," said sponsoring Sen. Steve Buehrer, a Republican from Delta.

    Buehrer said the bill would only make changes to self-defense law for those protecting their home, which he said was his primary concern. But the NRA said language in the bill would also apply outside the home.

    "Whether that ought to apply in other physical places is something we ought to debate," Buehrer said.

    Supporters of the bill provide anecdotes illustrating the need for the change, but mainly argue that it doesn't make sense to place the burden of proof on people trying to defend themselves.

    In a case "where a guy purely, clearly has the right to use self defense, we've had judges say, 'No, the guy with a broken leg should have jumped out the second-story window,' " said Jim Irvine, chairman of the Buckeye Firearms Association.

    NRA regional lobbyist John Hohenwarter predicted the issue will pass easily in the GOP-controlled Legislature.

    "You don't have to be 100 percent on NRA issues to agree that people have a right to defend themselves," he said.

    HAS GOVERNOR'S BACKING

    Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland supports the legislation.

    "The governor is a strong defender of Second Amendment rights and he supports the rights of individuals to defend themselves," spokesman Keith Dailey said.

    Supporters believe the change would enable people to better make decisions about how to respond in a dangerous situation, free of fear they will be prosecuted.

    But a problem with the bill is that people in disputes can "take the law into their own hands," said Toby Hoover, director of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence.

    "The big fear is that people with deadly weapons will now assume they are capable of making a decision of when that can be used, wherever they are," Hoover said.

    Hohenwarter said gun-control advocates sounded the same alarm when concealed-carry permits became law in many states. The "Wild West" prediction never materialized, he said.

    Just before a 2005 Florida law went into effect to remove residents' duty to retreat from conflict in public places, a group that supports restrictions on guns handed out fliers in Florida airports warning tourists not to argue with locals because of what they called the "Shoot First" law.

    Under the Florida law protecting people who are attacked, no one has used the new defense successfully to have murder charges dropped or to win acquittal from a jury. However, charges often are not filed in such self-defense cases.
    There was the obligatory Toby Hoover quotes in there, can't have a firearm news article in Ohio without her. I wish she would just go away.
    Fortes Fortuna Juvat

    Former, USMC 0311, OIF/OEF vet
    NRA Pistol/Rifle/Shotgun/Reloading Instructor, RSO, Ohio CHL Instructor

  8. #7
    Member Array MeanStreaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by buckeye07 View Post
    There was the obligatory Toby Hoover quotes in there, can't have a firearm news article in Ohio without her. I wish she would just go away.
    But then who would collect her salary that is paid for by the Brady Campaign, FreeStatesAlliance, etc?

    Every grassroots pro-gun group in Ohio (that I know of) works on the volunteered sweat of its volunteers. We all have day jobs, families, etc and do this on the side.

    She collects a salary!
    Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.
    --Thomas Paine

    Learn how Project Appleseed Marksmanship and Heritage events support freedom.

  9. #8
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Well of course Toby gets a salary... She's called a prostitute... and she knowing spreads information she knows is untrue for those who pays her salary.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  10. #9
    Senior Member Array Smith&Wessonfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    508
    [Toby Hoover]People are too stupid to be allowed to decide when they can lawfully use deadly force and when they cannot. Only us elites have that ability[/Toby Hoover]

    I can't say what I think about her without breaking several code of conduct rules.

  11. #10
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    What makes Toby think she's an Elite? She probably checks to see if a gun is loaded by sticking her eye in the muzzle.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array TonyW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    791
    I received the e-mail from the BFA on this one. Good stuff! We are slowly making progress here in Ohio. Sounds like it's time to write another letter to my congressman. :)
    <a target="_top" href="http://www.cybernations.net/default.asp?Referrer=TonyW"><img src="http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd188/18932471/imgad2-1.png" border="0"></a>

  13. #12
    Member Array My73LT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Orlando, Fla
    Posts
    35
    I live in Florida, and we're doing pretty good down here.. No wild west, no random shootouts..

    Castle Doctrine is working great.

  14. #13
    Member Array Schwebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by Bark'n View Post
    Well of course Toby gets a salary... She's called a prostitute... and she knowing spreads information she knows is untrue for those who pays her salary.
    I about spit diet 7up on my laptop after reading that..hahhahah. Hopefully soon Ohio can get rid of the stupid "liquor serving establishment" carry laws, I'm sick of eating Taco Bell.

  15. #14
    Senior Member
    Array Baby Hulk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,075
    + 1 for the Castle Doctrine & 'stand your ground' legistlation!


    - 1,000,000 for OH's current stupid 'obligation to retreat' legislatiion.
    It's not about the caliber you carry, it's about how you USE it.

    Acts 4:12
    (Mohammad Who?)

    1988 DIE HARD 2008
    NRA Member

  16. #15
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,646
    Ohio legislators (or any legislators for that matter) who refuse the opportunity to PREVENT criminals from suing their victims for (BG) injury incurred during the commision of their crime should be immediately fired...

    The entire concept of a criminal suing for injuries is nuts...what has this country come to? Could you imagine back in the Old West, a horse thief who was shot, trying to sue the family who shot him...the lawyer presenting the case would get shot too...not that that's a bad idea.

    OMO

    ret
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. NC Castle Doctrine introduced 6 April 09
    By Dal1Celt in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: April 10th, 2009, 07:48 AM
  2. Castle Doctrine Passed in Ohio
    By otbdave in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: July 14th, 2008, 10:29 PM
  3. Ohio castle doctrine
    By atctimmy in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: June 10th, 2008, 07:08 PM
  4. Castle Doctrine In Ohio (Merged)
    By mdrotar in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: April 21st, 2008, 12:39 PM
  5. OHIO MEMBERS... Our shot at a Castle Doctrine is coming up for vote.
    By ZW17 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: March 16th, 2008, 10:41 AM

Search tags for this page

buehrer it is time to put the power of self-defense back into the hands of law-abiding citizens

,

castle doctrine ohio

,

castle law dayton ohio

,

castle law in dayton

,

current ohio castle

,

is ohio one of the 38 other states have castle bills

,

ohio castle law

,

ohio shelter castle doctrine applies group home

,

state of ohio castle law in dayton ohio

,

toby hoover quotes

,

understanding ohio castle law

,

understanding the castle law ohio

,

www.ohiocastlelaw

Click on a term to search for related topics.