In June 2022, the state of Ohio enacted a significant change in firearm legislation: the implementation of permitless carry, also known as constitutional carry. This law allowed individuals aged 21 or older, who met legal requirements such as having no disqualifying criminal convictions, to carry concealed handguns without first obtaining a permit. It marked a substantial shift in the relationship between citizens and their right to self-defense, aligning Ohio with a growing number of U.S. states adopting similar measures (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
The law did not abolish all restrictions on carrying firearms. Certain locations remained prohibited, such as schools, government buildings, and private establishments that posted “no firearms” signs. Moreover, the state preserved the concealed handgun license system for individuals who wished to obtain it, particularly those who traveled across state lines and needed reciprocity. Nevertheless, the principle behind the reform was to ensure that law-abiding citizens were not forced to undergo bureaucratic hurdles to exercise a constitutional right (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
Following its passage, critics predicted an escalation of violent crime, often warning of an impending wave of shootings and public insecurity. This reaction echoed the familiar arguments historically raised whenever states expanded firearm rights. On the other hand, proponents argued that criminals had never followed licensing laws, and that empowering responsible citizens could serve as a deterrent against violence. To resolve the dispute between rhetoric and reality, the state of Ohio commissioned an independent, data-driven study (Center for Justice Research & Bowling Green State University, 2023).
The study analyzed pre- and post-law outcomes, covering the period from June 2021 to June 2023. In practical terms, this meant one full year before the enactment of permitless carry and one full year after. Researchers evaluated data from Ohio’s eight largest cities—Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Toledo, Akron, Dayton, Parma, and Canton. By focusing on urban centers, the study sought to capture areas where crime rates tend to be higher and where changes in policy would likely manifest most clearly (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
One of the central findings was that crime involving firearms decreased in six of the eight cities during the year following the law’s implementation. This outcome directly contradicted the widespread expectation that more permissive carry laws would trigger more violence. Instead, the data suggested that lawful citizens carrying without a permit did not destabilize public safety. In fact, it pointed toward a modest but meaningful reduction in firearm-related crimes in several major Ohio cities (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
Parma, for example, experienced a 22% reduction in crimes involving firearms. This was one of the most striking results, demonstrating that smaller urban centers could experience significant benefits from permitless carry. Similarly, Akron and Toledo both registered 18% decreases. These results are important not only statistically, but also socially, as they represent thousands of citizens experiencing greater security in their daily lives (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
Columbus, the state capital and Ohio’s largest city, also witnessed a decline in gun-related crimes. While the percentage reduction was not as dramatic as in Parma, Akron, or Toledo, the trend was still downward. Particularly notable in Columbus and Toledo was the decline in validated gunshot detection alerts, which fell by approximately 20–23%. This type of data is independent of police reporting and relies on acoustic detection systems, reinforcing the reliability of the trend (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
Not all cities followed the same trajectory. Dayton saw a 6% increase in firearm-related crimes, while Cincinnati registered a 5% rise. These modest upticks remind us that no single law can uniformly change outcomes across all geographic areas. Local socioeconomic conditions, policing strategies, and criminal dynamics play critical roles in shaping crime rates. Nevertheless, the overall statewide picture was one of stability or improvement, not deterioration (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
Another key aspect examined was the impact on law enforcement officers. Opponents of the law had warned that removing permit requirements would endanger police officers by increasing the number of armed confrontations. However, the data did not bear out this concern. In the year before the law, there were three incidents in which Ohio police officers were shot and injured or killed. In the year after, there were four. The difference was statistically insignificant, indicating that officer safety was not meaningfully compromised by permitless carry (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
In addition to firearms-related crimes, the study also analyzed overall violent crime and homicide data. Here, the results were more mixed. Some cities, such as Columbus, actually saw increases in homicides in 2023 compared to 2022, though these fluctuations were consistent with long-term urban crime trends and not clearly tied to the carry law. This underscores the complexity of attributing causality in social science: laws are one factor among many influencing crime rates (WOSU, 2024).
A particularly notable consequence of the law was the dramatic decline in concealed handgun permit applications. By 2024, the number of new permits issued in Ohio had fallen by approximately 85% compared to 2021, dropping from around 92,000 new permits in 2021 to only about 14,000 in 2024. This was expected, as the new law made permits optional for in-state carry. For many Ohioans, the ability to exercise their rights without additional paperwork was sufficient (Axios, 2025).
However, the licensing system did not disappear entirely. Many responsible gun owners continued to seek permits in order to carry legally when traveling to other states that recognize Ohio permits under reciprocity agreements. This demonstrates that the permitless carry law did not undermine the utility of the licensing system but instead transformed it into a voluntary option for those who needed it (Axios, 2025).
The broader lesson from Ohio is that fears of chaos resulting from permitless carry did not materialize. Instead, the data revealed that, at worst, the law had no significant negative impact on public safety, and at best, it coincided with reductions in certain categories of firearm-related crime. These outcomes reinforce the argument that expanding lawful access to firearms does not inherently threaten community safety (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
It is important to acknowledge the limitations of the study. First, the analysis covered only one year before and one year after the law’s enactment. This is a relatively short timeframe in criminological research, where long-term trends provide more reliable evidence. Second, the study itself cautioned against drawing definitive causal conclusions. Other variables—such as economic conditions, policing strategies, and the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic—may also have influenced the observed trends (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
Furthermore, the variation between cities suggests that permitless carry interacts with local conditions in different ways. For instance, while Parma saw a dramatic reduction, Dayton experienced a slight increase. These differences indicate that statewide averages must always be interpreted with care, and that local dynamics are crucial to understanding the effects of policy (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
Still, the overall pattern is clear: predictions of escalating violence proved unfounded. This aligns with a growing body of research across the United States indicating that shall-issue and permitless carry laws do not cause surges in violent crime. In fact, in many cases, they either coincide with declines or produce neutral effects. The Ohio experience provides yet another data point in this ongoing national discussion (Center for Justice Research & Bowling Green State University, 2023).
For the citizens of Ohio, the law represented more than just numbers on a crime chart. It was a reaffirmation of their constitutional right to self-defense. For too long, opponents of firearm rights have insisted that liberty must be curtailed in the name of safety. Ohio demonstrated that freedom and safety are not opposites but can coexist when citizens are trusted to act responsibly (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
The implications for other states are profound. Legislatures considering similar reforms now have additional evidence that permitless carry does not unleash violence. Instead, it offers citizens a direct path to exercising their rights without unnecessary bureaucratic interference. As more states adopt such laws, the body of data available to evaluate them will only grow, strengthening the empirical foundation for policy decisions (Axios, 2025).
Ohio’s story also has global relevance. In countries where governments resist acknowledging the right to self-defense, opponents often point to the United States as an example of chaos. Yet the reality in Ohio contradicts that narrative. Empowering citizens with the tools of self-defense did not destabilize society; on the contrary, it coincided with stability and in some cases improvement (WOSU, 2024).
At the same time, caution remains important. Advocates for liberty should not overstate the case by attributing every reduction in crime solely to the permitless carry law. Doing so would risk undermining credibility. Instead, the argument should rest on the solid ground that no increase in violence occurred, despite the expansion of rights. This point alone carries enormous weight in the debate over firearm policy (Center for Justice Research & Bowling Green State University, 2023).
Critics may argue that the declines were coincidental or part of larger national trends. Indeed, national crime rates have fluctuated in recent years, influenced by factors such as the pandemic, economic pressures, and shifts in law enforcement strategies. But even if Ohio’s results were coincidental, the fact remains that the feared bloodshed never happened. The absence of the predicted catastrophe is itself a powerful argument against restrictive policies (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
For law enforcement agencies, the transition required adaptation. Officers had to adjust to a world where the default assumption could no longer be that only licensed individuals carried concealed weapons. Training, procedures, and community engagement had to reflect this new reality. Yet the data showed that officers were not exposed to significantly greater danger, disproving the dire predictions of anti-gun activists (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
The Ohio experiment also sheds light on the psychology of deterrence. When criminals know that ordinary citizens may be armed, the calculus of committing a violent crime changes. While it is difficult to quantify deterrence, the consistent declines in several cities suggest that at least part of the explanation may lie in this effect. Deterrence does not require every citizen to carry—only that enough do so to create uncertainty for criminals (Center for Justice Research & Bowling Green State University, 2023).
One particularly interesting outcome was the divergence between cities with significant reductions and those with slight increases. This raises questions about the role of culture, community organization, and local enforcement in shaping the results of firearm policy. Future research will need to explore why Parma, Akron, and Toledo benefitted so clearly, while Dayton and Cincinnati did not (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
Ultimately, the Ohio case reinforces a broader truth: liberty is not dangerous. Governments often assume that freedom must be restricted in order to preserve order. But when liberty is respected, responsible citizens rise to the occasion. Ohio’s permitless carry law entrusted ordinary people with extraordinary responsibility, and the people proved worthy of that trust (Axios, 2025).
From a legal perspective, the reform aligned Ohio more closely with the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that the right to bear arms is fundamental, and state laws that unduly burden that right are constitutionally suspect. By enacting permitless carry, Ohio not only advanced public safety but also restored a proper balance between government authority and individual freedom (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
As of early 2025, nearly half of the U.S. states have adopted some form of permitless carry. Ohio is part of this national movement, contributing valuable data to the ongoing debate. Each state that embraces such laws adds to the evidence base, creating a clearer picture of how liberty and security interact. The more data points that emerge, the harder it becomes for opponents to argue from fear rather than fact (Axios, 2025).
The lesson for other nations is clear. When governments deny citizens the right to self-defense, they often justify it with the claim that more guns will mean more crime. Ohio’s experience shows the opposite: granting freedom does not destroy order. On the contrary, it may help preserve it. For Brazilians living under restrictive firearm policies, Ohio offers an encouraging example of what can happen when citizens are trusted (Instituto DEFESA, 2025).
In conclusion, Ohio’s permitless carry law represents a landmark in the ongoing struggle for the right to self-defense. One year of data does not tell the entire story, but it tells an important one: the expansion of liberty did not lead to chaos. Instead, it coincided with stability, reductions in several categories of crime, and an affirmation of constitutional principles. For advocates of freedom worldwide, this is a story worth telling and a precedent worth defending (Ohio Attorney General, 2023).
References
Axios. (2025, March 4). Ohio gun permits plummet under permitless carry law. Retrieved from https://www.axios.com/local/columbus/2025/03/04/ohio-gun-permits-permitless-carry-law
Center for Justice Research & Bowling Green State University. (2023). Pre- and Post-Outcomes: Ohio’s Permitless Carry Law. Ohio Attorney General’s Office.
Ohio Attorney General. (2023). Change in Concealed Carry Law Did Not Drive Violence in Ohio’s Cities. Ohio Attorney General’s News Release, January 2024.
WOSU. (2024, January 3). Study finds gun crimes decreased in Ohio cities during first year of permitless carry law. WOSU Public Media.
Instituto DEFESA. (2025). Internal analysis on the global relevance of Ohio’s firearm legislation.
