Ohio House Democrats propose 10-day waiting period for gun sales

By Nick Evans
Ohio Capital Journal

Two Ohio Democrats want to impose a 10-day waiting period before for gun purchases. The provision would only apply to licensed dealers, but the bill’s sponsors argue that cooling off period will save lives.

Despite strong majority support for restrictions like background checks or a ban on high-capacity magazines, limits on gun ownership remain polarizing.

With Republicans holding firm control of the Ohio Statehouse, the waiting period measure, like nearly any gun control proposal, is a long shot.

The bill’s sponsors, Cincinnati Democratic state Reps. Cecil Thomas and Rachel Baker, point to results in other states with waiting period laws. According to a 2017 study, mandatory waiting periods for handgun purchases reduce gun homicides by 17% and gun suicides by 7-11%.

“This brief cooling off period provides individuals with the time to reconsider their purchase,” Thomas argued, “especially in moments of emotional distress when impulsive decisions can have tragic consequences.”

Several states require waiting periods of various length. The longest is Hawaii with 14 days, and the shortest delay is three days or 72 hours, which Colorado, Illinois, Maine and Vermont require. Florida requires waiting three days or the time it takes to conduct a background check, whichever is longer.

Thomas and Baker’s 10-day proposal would put Ohio in line with California, Washington, and Washington, D.C.

Baker argued as lawmakers they have to balance the Second Amendment’s protection of gun ownership with public safety demands. Part of that is charge is keeping guns out the hands of people making “impulsive decisions driven by emotional distress” or “domestic violence situations where the presence of a weapon can escalate conflict to deadly levels.”

“As we look around state by state,” she argued, “the most effective firearm safety policies are those that respect rights with responsibility.”

Thomas and Baker, no doubt foreseeing the criticism they were about to face, were at pains to emphasize their respect for the Second Amendment.

“The focus of this bill is not to infringe upon Second Amendment rights,” Thomas said.

“Let me say that again,” he added, “the focus of this bill is not to infringe upon Second Amendment rights, but to ensure that fire firearms are acquired responsibly.”

Republicans on the committee weren’t exactly convinced.

State Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, reminded the sponsors that Ohio voters approved abortion protections in 2023, and on the strength of that amendment, state courts blocked Ohio’s abortion waiting period provisions while a court challenge plays out.

“Well, the Second Amendment is also a constitutional right,” Seitz said. “And so my question is, if the courts are right that a waiting period for abortion is an infringement of that constitutional right, then why would a waiting period of 10 days, as you propose in this bill, not also be an infringement of the Second Amendment constitutional right?”

Thomas didn’t have much of an answer, instead suggesting that was an argument for the judicial branch to sort out and reiterating the potential improvements in public safety.

State Rep. Jim Hoops, R-Napoleon, pointed to the discretion of the gun shop owner. If they get a sense from their interaction with the customer, they can always refuse to sell, he suggested. “Is there already a kind of a safeguard there?” Thomas replied that approach is putting a lot of reliance on a hunch.

Democratic committee members tried to help out with mixed results. State Rep. Dani Isaacsohn asked whether the sponsors had data on how popular their idea might be.

Thomas argued broad majorities support “common sense gun legislation” including red flag laws and universal background checks, but acknowledged “I do not have the data to show for this particular piece of legislation, but I do believe that that percentage would also be (in support) of this kind of legislation.”

State Rep. Richard Brown, D-Canal Winchester, took the Second Amendment question head on, asking how the sponsors square their restriction with the express “shall not be infringed” provision.

Instead of emphasizing the list of other states where waiting periods have been in place for years, or previous court rulings indicating governments have a role in regulating gun sales, Thomas pointed to the existing background check system.

While Ohio does not have a waiting period for firearms purchases, licensed dealers do run a background check. In many cases, that only takes a couple of minutes, but if there’s uncertainty, federal officials have three business days to respond.

One could “clearly” argue that represents a kind of infringement, Thomas said, then trying to frame their bill as a modest supplement to those safeguards.

“All this infringement does is say, ‘Hey, can you be a little bit more patient?’” he said.