Before they left Columbus for the May elections, the GOP-majority Ohio Senate voted along partisan lines to pass legislation aiming to curb local gun control measures.
Under , Ohio cities and towns can be sued for expanded damages for their gun control ordinances, if those ordinances are stricter than what is on the books statewide. It would add just five words, 鈥渋ncluding punitive or exemplary damages,鈥� to Ohio鈥檚 Revised Code, although it does not define punitive or exemplary damages.
鈥淚f anything, our citizens should feel emboldened to overturn these unlawful regulations, without having to face the financial burden of doing what is right,鈥� Sen. Terry Johnson (R-McDermott) testified Wednesday.
Democrats, however, argued SB 278 violates home rule, the authority of cities and towns to govern their own affairs under the Ohio Constitution. Senate President Rob McColley (R-Napoleon) rebuffed that, saying municipalities are violating the Second Amendment. And generally, state firearms laws preempt local ones.
鈥淭his is not a violation of home rule, home rule is still alive in the state of Ohio,鈥� McColley told reporters. 鈥淚n this case, offering more avenues for damages allows for a stronger deterrent.鈥�
Sen. Bill DeMora (D-Columbus) said the legislature has done little about gun violence, which has prompted municipalities to act.
鈥淚f the General Assembly won鈥檛 get on board, the least we should do is get out of their way,鈥� DeMora testified Wednesday.
He and others cited two city of Columbus ordinances, regulating ammo and safe storage of firearms, each of which have been in court for years.
SB 278 still needs to be heard in the House. Both chambers are now on break until May.