Citation(s) from the literature library

Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. 2022 ‘State Right to Bear Arms in Ohio.’ Other Laws & Policies. San Francisco, CA: Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. 27 May

Relevant contents

State Right to Bear Arms in Ohio

Article I, § 4 of the Ohio Constitution provides: "The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be kept up; and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power." The Supreme Court of Ohio has held that this provision "secures to every person a fundamental individual right to bear arms for 'their defense and security.'" (Emphasis omitted.) The court has also held, however, that article I, § 4 is subject to the reasonable exercise of the police power under article XVIII, § 3 of the Ohio Constitution.

In Arnold, the supreme court considered a challenge to Cleveland's ordinance banning the possession and sale of assault weapons. The court rejected the challenge, holding that although a municipality could not ban all firearms, Cleveland's ban on assault weapons did not violate article I, § 4.

More recently, in Klein v. Leis, the court reaffirmed its earlier characterization of article I, § 4, holding that Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§ 2923.12 and 2923.16, which at the time prohibited the carrying of concealed firearms, were constitutional. The court opined that while article I, § 4 does create a fundamental right, the right is subject to reasonable limitations, and "there is no constitutional right to bear concealed weapons." Sections 2923.12 and 2923.16 regulated the manner in which firearms could be carried, and the court noted that such regulations have long been accepted as reasonable limitations under article I, § 4. The court found that both the goal of maintaining an orderly and safe society and the means used to attain this goal were reasonable, and therefore did not violate article I, § 4. Note, however, that subsequent to Klein, the Ohio Legislature amended the law regarding concealed weapons, and under current law an individual may be licensed to carry a concealed handgun…

In addition to rejecting article I, § 4 challenges to Cleveland's ban on assault weapons and the state ban on carrying concealed weapons, Ohio courts have rejected similar challenges to the following regulations:

- Dayton's requirement that owners and purchasers of handguns obtain identification cards;
- Cincinnati's prohibition on possession of semiautomatic firearms and high-capacity magazines;
- Cleveland's prohibition of the manufacture, possession, sale, or purchase of .32 caliber (or less) handguns with barrel-lengths of less than three inches;
- Akron's prohibition on firearm possession by convicted felons; and
- Toledo's extensive firearms ordinance prohibiting certain classes of persons from possessing firearms, requiring identification cards to acquire or possess handguns, requiring firearms dealers to be licensed and keep certain records, and prohibiting the carrying of firearms in vehicles.

Finally, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rejected an article I, § 4 challenge to a Columbus ordinance banning assault weapons (although the ordinance was overturned on other grounds)…

[Editor's note: The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence regularly updates its webpages with new data as US gun regulation evolves state by state. For the most up-to-date information on US gun laws, please refer to the Giffords URL below]

ID: Q8255

As many publishers change their links and archive their pages, the full-text version of this article may no longer be available from the original link. In this case, please go to the publisher's web site or use a search engine.