|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
OH: House Bill 228 gives more protection to gun owners in self-defense cases
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
If you have to use a gun for self-defense, the law now does more to protect you.
House Bill 228 was once the “stand your ground” bill, but that language has been eliminated and now stands as a “self-defense” bill.
Before the law was amended, if you shot someone in self-defense you would have to prove your innocence. Now, Ohio is on the same page as the rest of the country: You would be innocent until proven guilty in those cases. The burden now lies on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(1/3/2019)
|
| That's the way it should be. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(1/3/2019)
|
| Caving in on "duty to retreat" was a big mistake. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
