She signed it, fellas

[MLR]

I just heard on the radio that if you have a conceal carry permit and you open carry, its a misdameanor. Is this true?

Was she talking about now or after the new Law goes into effect?

Michael

 

[Dave70968]

I believe Federal Court rulings override this. An officer is allowed to disarm a person for the duration of a stop for his own protection. I would be careful telling folks that they cannot be disarmed. I believe its a Terry Stop.
They do not actually have to suspect you of a crime they can just say it looked like you were about to commit one.

Michael

I don't think so. The Federal rulings merely say that the US Constitution doesn't forbid an officer from disarming you during a stop; if the state chooses to set a more-restrictive policy for its officers, the state's restriction would be effective.

 

[Dave70968]

I'm of two minds on this. After the qualified win in Heller, SCOTUS seems to lean towards some regulations of 2A rights as acceptable, just not an outright or effective ban. While I'd love to see constitutional carry with no permits, mandatory training or fees throughout the US, I can see that as trouble for our rights. With rights come responsibilities. One cannot survive without the other. Having a permit and training standards, increases the overall awareness of the carrier and logically reduces the occurrence of irresponsible behavior on their part. It doesn't eliminate it, but it reduces them to a level tolerable to the general non gun toting public.

Would you also say that we ought to have permits and standards for, say, the exercise of religion? I could point to all kinds of ill effects arising from the irresponsible exercise of religion, but we don't have to go ask Daddy Government's permission to exercise that right.

Just because nine people in black robes say something doesn't make it so. If it did, we'd still be forcibly sterilizing people with low IQs (Buck v. Bell), imprisoning entire races (Korematsu), and sending our kids to segregated schools (Plessy).

 

[UnSafe]

Would you also say that we ought to have permits and standards for, say, the exercise of religion? I could point to all kinds of ill effects arising from the irresponsible exercise of religion, but we don't have to go ask Daddy Government's permission to exercise that right.

Just because nine people in black robes say something doesn't make it so. If it did, we'd still be forcibly sterilizing people with low IQs (Buck v. Bell), imprisoning entire races (Korematsu), and sending our kids to segregated schools (Plessy).

Nice! I copied your quote into my quote file (yes, I have one..). Great stuff!

 

[TerryMiller]

Would you also say that we ought to have permits and standards for, say, the exercise of religion? I could point to all kinds of ill effects arising from the irresponsible exercise of religion, but we don't have to go ask Daddy Government's permission to exercise that right.Just because nine people in black robes say something doesn't make it so. If it did, we'd still be forcibly sterilizing people with low IQs (Buck v. Bell), imprisoning entire races (Korematsu), and sending our kids to segregated schools (Plessy).

Just curious. That statement with regards as to what "Daddy Government" says we can do doesn't seem quite right. In regards to religion, I doubt that one could sacrifice virgins or children to a "god." Also, remember that the First Amendment gives us the right to free speech, but we can't holler "FIRE" in a movie theatre if there isn't one.

Or, am I missing something in your comment?

 

[MLRyan]

The last thing we need is people with a current SDA license seeing these reports and thinking it's OK to carry openly right now. All that will do is cause problems and potentially stack the odds against us. Is this their intention?

Surely you know by now...yes, this is always their intention...

 

[Dave70968]

Just curious. That statement with regards as to what "Daddy Government" says we can do doesn't seem quite right. In regards to religion, I doubt that one could sacrifice virgins or children to a "god." Also, remember that the First Amendment gives us the right to free speech, but we can't holler "FIRE" in a movie theatre if there isn't one.

Or, am I missing something in your comment?

Yes. You're missing the part where the acts mentioned cause actual harm to others. If you'd like to use that analogy, please explain what harm befalls another when somebody carries a gun without a permission slip.

 

[Jack T.]

Also, remember that the First Amendment gives us the right to free speech, but we can't holler "FIRE" in a movie theatre if there isn't one.

You most certainly can yell "FIRE" in a theatre if there isn't one. The problem is when it causes a panic, or is *intended* to cause a panic. You think there hasn't ever been a play done in which an actor shouts "FIRE"?

I see this thrown out any time people talk about restricting rights. . .and it's rubbish.

 

[AKguy1985]

I'll post in this thread too. Gov Fallin kept her word and thats good in my book.

 

[O4L]

Thanks Governor!