Ohioans currently are allowed to carry openly firearms without a permit. Now a group of Republicans at the Statehouse has renewed efforts to extend the permission to carrying a concealed weapon. That’s right, no permit required. They have proposed similar legislation in the past, and it has fallen short. They sense new momentum this time with the supportive Mike DeWine in the governor’s office.

Approval and then the governor’s signature would be unfortunate. This is legislation goes way too far, leaving behind the arguments gun advocates made in supporting the enactment of the concealed-carry law not that long ago.

House Bill 174 has been dubbed by advocates the “constitutional carry” bill. Yet as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in establishing an individual right to bear arms for self-protection, that right is not unlimited. Reasonable regulation is allowed. Priority also goes to the safety of others. Which helps explain why police officers oppose such an expansion of concealed carry.

On Monday, Mayor Dan Horrigan, the Akron City Council, the Fraternal Order of Police and others at City Hall expressed their opposition to the legislation. The bill would permit anyone age 21 or older to carry a concealed gun as long as they are not barred by federal law because of a felony conviction or other offense from obtaining a firearm. What especially troubles city and police officials is the provision repealing the requirement that when stopped, concealed-carry owners must notify police officers they are carrying a gun.

As Frank Williams, the president of the Akron police union, put it, “It just makes it so much safer for everybody concerned if we know that someone is carrying a gun.” For starters, misunderstandings are less likely to turn deadly.

When the state set up concealed carry, it required a gun owner to gain a permit from a county sheriff, pass a criminal background check and complete 12 hours of training. Since then, the training hours have been reduced to eight. Now the permit and the training would be eliminated. What happened to the argument of gun-rights advocates that such requirements would help to ensure concealed carry just went to responsible gun owners?

The proposed legislation would allow concealed rifles and shotguns, too.

This wouldn’t be the first time the Republican majorities have pushed aside such concerns of law enforcement. They did so, for instance, when they expanded the places where concealed carry is allowed. Yet it is not just a matter of ignoring law enforcement. In a study released two years ago, the National Bureau of Economic Research found through sophisticated modeling that violent crime rates are higher today (an estimated 13 percent to 15 percent) than they would have been in the states that have adopted concealed carry.

What police officers know and researchers have confirmed is that the more guns in circulation, the higher the rate of gun violence. That is the result even when current vetting attaches to concealed-carry permits. Now lawmakers want to ease dramatically that regimen? And the governor, a former county prosecutor and state attorney general, stands with them?

It is worth noting that approval would come after lawmakers showed practically no interest in the sensible gun regulations proposed by John Kasich in his final year as governor, including improved reporting to the background check system and a “red flag” provision to keep guns out of the hands of those deemed by the courts to be a threat to themselves or others. The Supreme Court has spoken: There is an individual right to own a gun. What lawmakers continue to miss is the balancing perspective of public safety.