Last week, Gov. Mike DeWine signed legislation prohibiting Ohio financial institutions from using a separate business code for gun stores or requiring gun owners to purchase liability insurance. The measure also prohibits governments and agencies from maintaining lists of gun owners.
Similar commercial code bans have been enacted in more than 15 other states. It is worth noting, however, that the authors of the bill did not identify a single Ohio entity that would consider requiring insurance or a list of owners. Therefore, the purpose of the proposal appears to be to establish the credibility of pro-gun lawmakers.
It also offers a potential answer to the question of where messaging legislation is headed now that state leaders have already adopted almost every policy firearms enthusiasts could ask for. Because state laws already support unwavering positions, arming teachers and banning guns, lawmakers are forced to pursue hypothetical threats to the Second Amendment.
Last minute changes
The measure signed by Governor DeWine included two separate pieces of firearms legislation at the end of the session. After combining these bills, House lawmakers proposed another piece of legislation known as the Second Amendment Protection Act.
Angry over restrictions imposed by the Bureau of Tobacco Alcohol and Firearms, sponsors proposed removing all references to federal firearms regulations from state law to prevent local police forces from assisting federal agencies. They presented the proposal as an “anti-command” bill, i.e., prohibiting federal officials from using local authorities to enforce federal law.
However, this solution went a few steps further. The original version sought to write the sponsors’ interpretation of the Second Amendment into state law, a task typically reserved for courts. Once these “violations” were codified, local police departments would face severe penalties for any alleged violations. Departments can even be fined for hiring someone who previously worked for a federal agency.
Opponents warned that the proposal would paralyze task forces fighting drug and human trafficking and weaken tools such as the ballistics database that authorities exploit in cases of gun violence. The Missouri law on which it is modeled was invalidated by a federal court and last year by a federal appeals court unanimously upheld this decision.
A House amendment adding these provisions to the bill failed.
What now?
Dean Rieck, who heads the Buckeye Firearms Association, praised DeWine for signing the bill banning liability insurance and property tracking.
He characterized the core legislation as “fighting recent efforts by gun control advocates to make gun ownership more expensive and less private for law-abiding gun owners, rather than cracking down on actual criminal misuse of firearms.”
As for his organization’s priorities going forward, he said it would fight “Second Amendment violations” and urge both parties to prioritize measures to hold violent criminals accountable.
🇺🇸💪 Well done 💪🇺🇸
We would like to thank the Marshal very much @jasoncstephens on fulfilling his campaign commitment to advance Ohio’s Second Amendment Protection Act. On Wednesday, December 11, 2024, Speaker Stephens brought SAPA to a vote in the Ohio House of Representatives.
He… pic.twitter.com/bYy44UIMD7
— Ohio Gun Owners (@OhioGunOwners) December 20, 2024
The Second Amendment Protection Act has been a top priority for Ohio Gun Owners. On social media, the group’s chairman, Chris Dorr, argued against Republican Party members who voted against the amendment should face the main challenges. The group later published posts thanking individual members for the 32 Republicans who wanted to pass the legislation.
The measure’s central premise was that state law could be used to soften the impact of federal firearms regulations by depriving agencies of local assistance. But even after a conservative, pro-gun administration took office, Dorr said it was equally critical to pass the bill.
“It is critical that the General Assembly pass the Ohio Second Amendment Protection Act during the Trump administration so that, thanks to a Second Amendment-friendly Justice Department, this law can take effect and remain on the books long after President Trump is gone from the White House.” – he argued.
Dorr said they expect the matter to be reconsidered in the upcoming General Assembly, and although he declined to name them, he said they have a sponsor. As for other priorities, he described even greater “stand your ground” protections and the right to “carry, transport or possess any legal weapon” an Ohioan has, not just a handgun.
For now, though, he emphasized their good fortune that DeWine has signed any firearms legislation.
“Legislation like this is exactly the type of legislation that the Ohio General Assembly should put on its desk in response to big corporations’ attacks on conservative America,” he said.
What the opponents think
For organizers pushing for greater gun restrictions, lawmakers ultimately opposing the most radical proposal doesn’t count as a victory.
Last session, Democrats proposed several measures to provide a modicum of control over gun sales or promote gun safety. One bill included a 10-day waiting period for gun sales. Another would eliminate taxes on gun locks and other security devices. The most radical proposal would repeal the law allowing Ohioans to carry concealed weapons without a permit. None of them made it through.
Alison Shih, senior adviser to Everytown for Gun Safety, criticized the bill approved by DeWine last week and derided lawmakers’ months-long debate over the Second Amendment Protection Act.
“This is a perfect example of what gun rights extremists in Ohio, led by Governor DeWine, love to do,” she argued. “Instead of taking action to end the gun violence crisis – which kills children and teenagers more than anything else in this country – by pushing bills like the Second Amendment Protection Act, lawmakers are creating a culture of fear by inventing some senseless, sinister bogeyman that is coming. steal their rights.”
“These lawmakers seem to be more interested in protecting violence than in protecting victims,” she added. “Instead of creating even a moderate culture of responsible gun ownership, these gun extremist lawmakers are sacrificing family life in Ohio.”
Follow Ohio Capital Journal reporter Nick Evans on X Or on Bluesky.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

