- Esrati - https://esrati.com -

The Decertification of Sanity in Ohio

A group of moron legislators in Ohio are trying to pass a “constitutional carry” law in Ohio- House Bill 147. They think it’s a god-given right to carry a concealed firearm, and that we’d somehow all be safer if people with zero training were allowed to carry concealed weapons.
As a recent CCW course graduate, before it went from 12 to 8 hours, I can say that the CCW course was inadequate compared to my military training and Jr. NRA training I got as a 13-year-old. But it was something.

From the Dayton Daily news:

Only Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, Vermont and Wyoming currently have a “constitutional carry” law, the phrase given bills like House Bill 147.

Paul Zeltwangar, R-Mason, one of those who cosponsored the bill, said since the Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, “what’s the purpose of the registering process?” Zeltwangar said there are no negatives associated with the bill.

Other area lawmakers supporting the bill include Reps. Niraj Antani, R-Miami Twp.; Wes Retherford, R-Hamilton; Kyle Koehler, R-Springfield; Nino Vitale, R-Urbana; Jim Buchy, R-Greenville; Margaret Conditt, R-Liberty Twp.; and Ron Maag, R-Lebanon.

via Foes fire back at Ohio gun bill [1].

My basic stance on gun ownership is that it should be as least as difficult to get a gun as it is to get a car and a driver’s license. Some training, a written test and competency evaluation. Insurance should also be part of the deal. However, since we’re moving away from permits and training, what else could we change to be more “constitutional?”

You currently need permits to sell beer and alcohol, to brew beer and you have to be over 21 to consume it. This seems awfully restrictive and intrusive, HB 148 will reduce the drinking age to 12 and allow anyone to sell alcohol.

HB 149 believes that medical licenses and training are also unnecessary, Ohio will become the first “Free Medicine State” where anyone can practice medicine and charge for it.

HB 150 goes hand in hand with HB 149, dropping requirements for law school or passing the bar exam. With the new influx of “doctors” we’ll need more “lawyers” to sue. After all, Clarance Darrow never graduated from law school.

HB160 will eliminate all professional certifications and requirements of competency for architects, structural engineers, surveyors. Said Representative Antani, “they built the pyramids and the great wall of China without any licenses.”

HB 161 will eliminate all certifications for public safety personnel. “It’s obvious that police training doesn’t stop cops from shooting unarmed black men in the back for a traffic stop” said Rep. Zeltwangar, so why pretend anymore.

HB 162 eliminates all requirements for health department inspections, agriculture inspections, etc. “They eat a kind of sushi in Japan that can kill you” says Rep. Buchy, “what are we so worried about.”

HB 163 however strengthens licensing requirements for barbers and hair dressers. “We can’t have felons using a razor blade on people without proper regulation, and of course, having a bad haircut is a crime” said Rep. Maag.

And we’re still firmly against allowing gay people to marry and women to choose the right to have an abortion because, well, because we’re Republicans.

The Republican members of the Ohio House are scrambling to find other things to un-regulate and de-certify, including oversight on slot machines and casinos, fracking, fertilizer sales and application and ending the onerous task of doing safety inspections on roller coasters- “aren’t they much more exciting when they derail?” said Rep. Koehler.

Unfortunately, the only training and certification we really need in Ohio isn’t being talked about at all: IQ, Civics and Sanity tests for all elected officials, because electing stupid people is not just our constitutional right, it’s our destiny.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed [2]! If you wish to support this blog and independent journalism in Dayton, consider donating [3]. All of the effort that goes into writing posts and creating videos comes directly out of my pocket, so any amount helps!
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Greg Hunter

You have read the constitution have you not. You continue to make statements without considering this guiding document. None of the other items you mention ARE rights, they are privileges. Is it really that hard for you? If you don’t like it change the 2nd amendment. It’s simple.

Larry Evans

Isn’t eliminating the few requirements we have now getting even further away from the “well regulated” part of the 2nd amendment, not to mention the fact that the whole “membership in a militia” stipulation has always been ignored? So much for adhering to the constitution…

Pat Offenberger

The “well regulated” phrase of the 2nd amendment referred more to militia members being similarly equipped.

Larry Evans

Got it. So in other words, the 2nd Amendment applies to militia members, not the general populace.

Bubba Jones

No, Larry, that’s not what it means.

Read the text of the Second Amendment – “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

It specifically says “the right of the PEOPLE’, not the right of the militia. Plain and simple.

And, Pat, during the period that the Constitution and Bill of Rights were drafted, the term “well regulated” meant something that was in proper working order, not something subject to “regulations.”

A “militia” does not mean the “standing army” that the Constitution allows Congress to raise and maintain. A little research into the writings of people who were prominent at the time will answer the question of what a militia is…. “I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.” — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution. For more on this issue, check out http://www.constitution.org/mil/cs_milit.htm

Also note that the text of the Amendment says “A” militia, not “THE” militia. This indicates that the founders wanted to leave the door open for the people to form a militia, if necessary, for the defense of the Republic.

Article 4 of the Ohio Constitution also states that “The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security”. It doesn’t limit that right only for “defense and security” inside ones home. That’s about as unambiguous as it gets.

Ohio already allows for “open carry” (since it’s Constitutionally protected!!) The problem with law abiding people openly carrying their sidearms is that it tends to panic the people around them. Doesn’t it makes sense to allow people to exercise a right in a manner that won’t panic and upset the people around them? And the non-law-abiding people are already carrying their illegal arms in a concealed fashion so it won’t make any difference for them.

Greg Hunter

Even though my original comment has been hidden due to down votes, this exemplifies the beauty of the Democratic Republic. The founders knew that rabble, led in this case by Esrati, could not easily voted stupidity as the course of the day. These Rights are hard to take away for good reason, even though the voting rabble doesn’t get it. If you don’t understand the Constitution, you really should not vote.

Thanks for the support Pat and Bubba.

Bubba Jones

Greg – there’s quite a bit that you and I disagree on, but 2-A is not one of them.

You are right about people not understanding the difference between passing a law and passing an amendment to the Constitution – at both the Federal and State levels. Idiot voters passed a Constitutional Amendment to the Ohio Constitution to allow gambling at only certain locations controlled by certain corporations. I would bet that 90%+ of the voters didn’t understand the significance of adding this to the Constitution.

Ditto for the idiots that passed a Constitutional Amendment requiring an inflationary increase to Ohio’s minimum wage every year. And for those of you that don’t think that affects entry level jobs, go around to the municipal rec centers and ask the hiring managers there how rising wages affects their budgets. Oh, just pass along the cost to the working families that have their kids enrolled? Yeah, right.

And now the push is on to pass an amendment allowing for pot growing. I wonder what the next amendment is going to be?

Greg Hunter

Funny stuff the thrust for new ballot measures. I think it is a way for people to “vote” on things that used to be handled by the elected legislature. The legislature refuses to do their job and pass legislation that makes sense. While Ohio is passing stupid gambling legislation, the Colorado voters (and other States, sans Alaska) passed weed legislation, defying the Feds. So there is good with the bad. Ohio has saturated the gambling market and their will be fallout, but hey you cannot fix stupid. Esrati is supposedly intelligent and still refuses to understand the 2nd amendment or how to change the Constitution. Weird really.

Ralph

I refuse to be subject to any licensing requirements to own a gun. Furthermore, if I feel myself or my loved ones lives are in jeopardy I will carry a firearm wherever I please, law be damned. I’m not going to tell a government I don’t trust that I own a firearm.

Because you served in the military doesn’t make you more responsible or a better marksman than me or my neighbor. Training comes from use and if you don’t use it you lose it.

Ice Bandit

…no need for my input. Bubba Jones said it better than I could on my smartest and most articulate day…

Bubba Jones

Aww, shucks Bandito! Yer a makin’ me blush!! That is quite a compliment coming from the Esrati.com contributor who I consider to be THE most insightful, intelligent and articulate on the forum!!

William

Why are you fighting permitless carry ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp50hmieYkw
WE CAN ALREADY CARRY OPENLY WITHOUT THE PERMIT OR TRAINING BUT …… IF IT PASSES IT JUST MEANS WE CAN ALSO CARRY CONCEALED!
Vermont never has required a concealed carry license and anyone 16 years of age can own a handgun without parental consent or registering the weapon. And yet Vermont is pretty much always very low where violent crime is concerned. You clowns who are against this are pretty much saying that OHIOANS arent as capable and intelligent as those folks in VERMONT and a few other states where this is ALREADY the law! Ohioans CAN ALREADY CARRY A GUN OPENLY WITHOUT TRAINING OR A LICENSE ! THIS LAW DOES NOT CHANGE WHO CAN CARRY A GUN!