Ohio firearms bill sparks strong views

Opinions pro and con flow locally after Fla. shooting

A firearms control bill being considered by the Ohio Senate appears to be popular in one way, less so in another.

Senate Bill 260 was introduced Feb. 20, six days after 17 people were gunned down in a Florida high school by a former student using an AR-15 rifle. The bill is in two general parts, one of which would ban the possession of semi-automatic firearms that are built with or accept magazines with a capacity of 10 rounds or more. The other section would instruct the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation to establish a statewide database to track the transfer of all firearms and ammunition.

Washington County Sheriff Larry Mincks said Wednesday he likes the idea of the database but not the weapons restrictions.

"The registration, I think that's something that's needed for law enforcement to track the people going to flea markets on Saturdays and purchasing firearms," he said.

"The rest of the bill isn't anything I like as a Second Amendment person. I know what they're doing, it's a reaction to the Florida shooting, and I certainly don't want to see anything else like that, but I would like to see more background information, more comprehensive checks, for example, to flag people with mental problems or domestic violence records," he said. "I really think they need to go further as far as backgrounds are concerned."

Mincks said the section on weapons would have the effect of making several widely-owned models of handgun illegal as well as semi-automatic, high-capacity rifles.

"It would outlaw the Glock 19, for example, and similar handguns made by others like Sig Sauer and Smith & Wesson," he said. "I have a Sig P320, semi-automatic single action, that can use a 20-round magazine. I'm not opposed to somebody owning one of those. It's not really the weapon I'm interested in, it's the people who own them."

Opinions in a quick parking lot survey of Marietta Wednesday were divided, with four people and one family group reluctant to express an opinion for fear of offending friends but two others willing to be heard.

"I have friends who own guns, and they seem to serve a purpose, for hunting and self-defense," said Marietta resident Lynn LaBarre, 70. "I've shot one but got no great satisfaction out of it."

LaBarre said she would favor a registration database, raising the age limit for purchase and restricting the types of guns legal for purchase.

At the other end of the spectrum, William Ochampaugh, 37, of Marietta, said everyone should be able to buy whatever type of firearm they like.

"I support the Second Amendment, and it's intended to allow us to protect ourselves from the actions of a tyrannical government," he said.

"The licensing is helpful, but you're never going to legislate crime away," he said. "For school shootings, I think an armed guard is the answer. With gun-free zones, they know there's no resistance."

Ochampaugh said he has children at one of the Warren schools, at Veritas Academy and at the career center. He said he doesn't worry about their safety at those schools.

"If they were at Marietta, I'd be worried," he said. "If they were at Parkersburg, I'd be terrified."

Ohio Sen. Frank Hoagland, R-Mingo Junction, who represents the Marietta area, said in an emailed statement:

"This bill is clearly unconstitutional. The bottom line is both sides of the gun control issue can argue until the cows come home to Columbus, what is needed now and what we can do right now, is build on the school safety measures the state has already established. I'm working on that, and I strongly believe safety for our students and teachers must be a priority."

Ohio Sen. Charleta Tavares, D-Columbus, a co-sponsor of the bill, said Wednesday she would be amenable to dividing up the bill if necessary to present the registration and restriction portions separately.

Noting that she can't speak for the bill's other sponsor, Sen. Mike Skindell, D-Lakewood, she said, "We could have done it in several pieces but chose to combine them, like we did in 2013."

A similar bill was introduced then but failed.

"I'm not opposed to doing the registration part separately, then offer up the ban on assault weapons," she said, and added that the bill was not intended to ban hand guns.

"The intent was toward automatic rifles designed for the military. These were never designed for the average citizen, never designed for hunting, they were designed for mass murder," she said.

Regarding the firearms transfer database, which would effectively be a registration record, Tavares said, "At this point we haven't been prescriptive as to the information that would be in it, it would just show who controls the weapon and who has purchased weapons so we have up-to-date information.

"And the intent is certainly to close the gun show loophole. We have no idea about whether guns are being sold to people with criminal backgrounds, people who have committed violent acts, because there is no record," she said. "This certainly could prevent some of these heinous shootings."

Tavares said the bill has been referred to the Government Oversight Committee.

"It's a deliberative process, we know there might be compromise, we know it might not be exactly the same," she said.

At a glance

Ohio Senate Bill 260, 132nd General Assembly

¯ Co-sponsors: Sens. Mike Skindell (D–Lakewood, District 23) and Charleta Tavares (D-Columbus, District 15).

¯ Terms: Would establish a statewide database of firearms and ammunition transfers, and ban semi-automatic firearms that accept magazines of 10 rounds or more.

¯ Introduced Feb. 20.

Source: S.B. 260.