Ok open carry

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

shiftyer1

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
1,671
Location
central texas
I just saw a post somewhere about oklahoma passing a law allowing open carry, all I can say is congrats. I sure hope texas is soon to follow!!!!!
 
While it is no doubt a step forward as far as our 2A rights are concerned, OC in OK is still pretty heavily regulated seeing as only CHL holders are allowed to carry openly. I'd like to see some revision to our OC laws that discard the need for a CHL to carry openly(given that the individual is above 18 years of age and allowed to possess a weapon). With that being said I don't really see the general "mainstream" public in OK buying into that and I live in a pretty rural area, but still one can inform, educate, and even lobby.
 
What makes so little sense to me is the difference between such ridiculous laws from one state to the next. When I retire, I'll be moving from AZ to MN and truly regret leaving behind the common sense laws AZ has regarding firearms. While not as bad as some, MN's pretty much stink, in my opinion.

Amazingly, when AZ adopted constitutional carry, the streets didn't turn red with blood. AZ recently passed legislation allowing for the use of suppressors during hunting. In contrast, it is a felony to posses one in MN, let alone actually use it on a firearm.

Why the huge disparity between states? How do you get the folks in one to look at another state and realize their highly restrictive laws are ridiculous and unnecessary?
 
psyshack said:
I'm for the OC in OK and the permit system.
Click to expand...
Just curious....why the support for the permit system? What is the difference between paying the state for a permit to exercise the 2nd Amendment right to carry a firearm versus the right to attend church, would it be OK to be required to pay the state for a permit for that? Or the right to free speech and post in this thread on the internet, pay the state for doing this?

How about if you had to pay the state for a background check and permit in order to be protected against unreasonable searches and seizures afforded by the 4th amendment? That would make sense, right? Wouldn't it make LEO job easier if they could just stop people and frisk anyone who didn't have their state issued "good guy" card?

Why are we so accepting of a permit to exercise the 2nd Amendment right to carry a gun?
 
The political hacks who run the OK legislature passed unrestricted open carry a few years ago as a political statement; knowing that governor Brad Henry would veto the bill. Those same political hacks promised us if we elected a governor of their party they would give us unrestricted open carry.

In 2011 unrestricted open carry was proposed in the OK legislature as promised. The legislature had to get innovative fast and kill this bill because the state police and police unions were opposed to it. The House leadership put together an unconstitutional committee to rule on open carry. All the committee Democrats and some of those gun loving Republicans voted to kill Constitutional open carry in OK.

One of the OK senate fathers of this latest abortion called "open carry" made the statement: "OK is not ready for Constitutional open carry". This constipated political jerk apparently never read the US Constitution.

The only way we will ever get Constitutional open carry in OK is by referendum. We did that with the lottery. After the OK legislature refused to outlaw cockfighting we killed it in 2003 by referendum. Some jerks in the legislature tried to resurrect cockfighting.
 
Last edited:
^ True to all that.

We have patchwork gun laws thanks to the Federal System. It's the same quirk iof governance that gives us States' Rights.
 
I agree, OC (and carrying in general for that matter) shouldn't be restricted to permit holders, but at least it's a step in the right direction! The thing that gets me is how, in places like Texas, the laws against OC are so strict, they can get you for "brandishing" even if you only accidentally expose your gun for a second or it prints through your cover garment. At least those of you who cc in OK are safe from that sort of nonsense now.
 
arizona98tj said:
What makes so little sense to me is the difference between such ridiculous laws from one state to the next. When I retire, I'll be moving from AZ to MN and truly regret leaving behind the common sense laws AZ has regarding firearms. While not as bad as some, MN's pretty much stink, in my opinion.

Amazingly, when AZ adopted constitutional carry, the streets didn't turn red with blood. AZ recently passed legislation allowing for the use of suppressors during hunting. In contrast, it is a felony to posses one in MN, let alone actually use it on a firearm.

Why the huge disparity between states? How do you get the folks in one to look at another state and realize their highly restrictive laws are ridiculous and unnecessary?
Click to expand...
WA just got rid of the supressor foolishness...law enforcement was at the front pushing for supressors...why? Hearing health issues...that is the approach you need to try in MN. Don't work the legislature, get some of you high LE friends on the bandwagon...if they promote it, they sure won't sabotage a bill to allow it. (make sure they don't make it for LE only)
 
they can get you for "brandishing" even if ..................it prints through your cover garment.
Click to expand...


IMO: In OK its one of those everlasting myths. "Imprinting" does not meet the OK standard for brandishing. Every person i ever heard of being charged with brandishing in OK pulled a gun. In the summer i dress lightly and sometimes my gun is visible through my clothing. Never been hassled by the police or anyone else for "imprinting".

From Websters College Dictionary:

Brandish: flourish; wave
 
Please look up Texas Brandishing, no such thing.

CHAPTER 42. DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND RELATED OFFENSES

Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:

(8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;

And:

§ 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE
HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license
holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person
under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code,
and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.
 
Maybe it's not called brandishing. All I know is, I have heard from many Texas residence that if you accidentally print, you are in violation of the law and can be arrested for it. I guess I should have looked it up.
 
When I took my CCW course, and I've got to pony up another $80.00, more finger prints and forms the end of this year, open carry was legal as long as no-one complained. You can be had for something on the order of "terrorizing the public" just by having a firearm exposed. NC has some of the craziest state and local laws anywhere.
 
Mr. D said:
Maybe it's not called brandishing. All I know is, I have heard from many Texas residence that if you accidentally print, you are in violation of the law and can be arrested for it. I guess I should have looked it up.
Click to expand...
Accidental is the key, it's "ok" if it's an accident, but a responding officer doesnt know that and your only chance to prove it was an accident may be in the court room.
 
That makes sense. Either way, I think it is ridiculous that one could get in trouble because his/her gun printed when legally carrying, whether it was an accident or not, especially in a relatively freedom-oriented state such as Texas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top