...allow anyone to carry a gun in a motor vehicle as long as it is in a case and unloaded. The case, however, would not have to be locked and the ammunition could be close by and at the ready, so the gun could be loaded quickly. Although the gun clearly would be concealed, no concealed-carry permit would be required to carry a gun in this way.
Although the NRA claims this is a needed boost in Ohioans' self-defense rights, it might just as easily be called the traffic-stop-nightmare bill for police or the drive-by-shooters' helper.
I know this is going to cause shock waves to ripple through the editorial suite of the Dispatch, but most folks heading out to do a drive-by are probably not going to take the time to familiarize themselves with the finer points of Ohio Revised Code. Most responsible citizens don't need a "drive-by-shooters' helper" -- because they don't ever intend to execute a drive-by shooting.
The rest of the editorial is just as silly. Here's another elitist statement:
Landlords who believe banning handguns on their property improves safety should be allowed to impose such bans.
Tenants have freedom of choice of where to live. A renter's wish to own a handgun is a personal preference that cannot be allowed to take precedence over the rights of a property owner.
So those poor unfortunates who have been kicked out of their homes due to predatory mortgage lenders, and are now forced to rent in a high-crime neighborhood as their last, desperate step before homelessness, can't protect themselves if their landlord is a gun-fearing weenie. Protecting your family is not a "personal preference" to these folks -- it is a responsibility that is part of their daily reality. And by the way, their less law-abiding neighbors -- who don't concern themselves with the finer points of Ohio Revised Code, either -- probably are armed.