In Columbus, Ohio, authorities are intensifying their opposition to the state’s firearm preemption law. They are doing so by revising a local ordinance that already faced legal challenges, which prohibits the sale and possession of “large capacity” magazines.
The revised ordinance mandates that existing owners must either dispose of them, make permanent modifications, or surrender them to the police by July 1st.
The Columbus ordinance establishes the definition of “large capacity” as any magazine with a capacity of 30 rounds or more.
However, the council’s intentions go beyond this limit. The current ordinance serves as a test case to challenge Ohio’s preemption law. If the courts rule in favor of the ordinance, it may pave the way for additional infringements on gun owners’ rights.
Currently, the ordinance has enforcement provisions that may affect numerous law-abiding gun owners residing in or even that may be passing through the city. This is particularly concerning, given that the courts have thus far declined to suspend the ordinance’s enforcement.
SEE ALSO: Superintendent Resigns After Student Finds Gun in Bathroom
Under the December 5 legislation, individuals in possession of a magazine capable of accommodating 30 or more rounds would face misdemeanor charges. The charges carry a mandatory sentence of 180 consecutive days in jail without work release, as well as a possible sentence of up to one year and a fine of $1,500.
On January 20, a Fairfield County judge denied the state of Ohio’s request for a preliminary injunction that would have prohibited the city’s firearm restrictions.
As a result, those restrictions were set to go into place at midnight on January 21, according to Zach Klein the Columbus City Attorney.
The Buckeye Institute, a conservative think-tank, lodged a lawsuit on February 16th in the Delaware County Common Pleas Court. The suit challenges the gun restrictions imposed by Columbus, which encompasses a part of Delaware County.
Tryon explained that the lawsuit was filed in Delaware County, which leans more conservative compared to the heavily Democratic Franklin County. He reasoned that Delaware County was the suitable jurisdiction for this type of legislation. When pressed for further details, Tryon preferred to keep his response brief, stating, “I’d like to leave it at that.”
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE! ***
I wonder if a manufacturer could produce a device that would easily go into a magazine and only allow 29 rounds to be loaded in said magazine. Then they would be “legal” under the new restrictions until it can be challenged in court and removed.
Like a permanent sight-right laser?
I was fishing and camping last week and I had all my guns and ammo in the boat crossing the lake and it sank. Sorry I can’t help you officers.
DAM If I would hand over my property to the DAM Government because some liberal cocksucker said so
Think about it Today it is Firearms tomorrow it will be your home and car
The communists who crave control over their subjects are coming for your Constitutional rights, and they don’t give a damn about the Constitution or the Bill of Rights!!!
Key point: constitutional right.
It sure is.
The law applies to “existing owners,” not to non-existing owners. LOL
Columbus Democrats want everyone to turn in their hi-cap mags? Yeah, well, good luck with that. First of all, criminals aren’t going to turn in theirs and, second, The Columbus Division of Police already has all the staffing, racial, and legal problems it can handle and more.
Lefty blue jurisdictions don’t care. Virtue signalling is in their DNA.
Completely unconstitutional. Will not stand. Just need to get to a court that will uphold the constitution. If not, use them for what our founding fathers intended.
“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.”
Progressives love to control everyone’s lives….except their own ( where they continously boast about being “pro-choice”)😡