Do You Want Constitutional Carry in Oklahoma?

[Glocktogo]

While I'd love to continue the debate in another thread, I'm going to honor OP's request to stop mucking up his thread.

I'd just like to point out that simply because someone thinks they may be more qualified to comment on this subject than the rest of us, they aren't. While I might wish to license and tax someone's right to speak in these threads (and require training so they don't make confusing statements and use poor Eng. Comp.), I can't. It's a right, period.

Constitutional Carry is long overdue in OK. There are no studies that show a higher rate of wrongful shootings in the states that have it. Anecdotal observations aside, it makes sense to have it IF you value the Constitution and are capable of using logic rather than emotion. JMO, YMMV

 

[ProBusiness]

I appreciate the conversation.

I do not think it is appropriate to put words into peope's mouths. I think it is cheap to make a winning point to say 'well you said', when in fact the person did not say that.

Like I said at first, this would not be a popular position. But it is mine only through experience of training the public many of who are novices with firearms and do not have your knowledge of firearms or self defense laws.

My point about licensing is that our society over many years feels certain things or professions serve the public good if licensed. Please do not put words into my mouth and say I meant so and so when the above sentence is what I meant and said.

Now,if you would like to go to an unlicensed dr. or dentist, that is your right.

Glocktogo said:

I'd just like to point out that simply because someone thinks they may be more qualified to comment on this subject than the rest of us, they aren't

Respectively I think you are wrong. Everyone has an opinion. But experience counts. A person that has been teaching this topic week after week learns things. Has some opinions reinforced and some opions are proven wrong. Just like a LEO gains eperience every month on the job, I do not have the LEOs knowledge, just like a veteran that has seen action has experience, others think they know about it but you don't until you spend the time doing it, just like in any job,experience teaches you things.

 

[SM Rider]

The fact remains that most people are still wanting to petition a paper fiction to exercise a natural human right. This implies then that the right is not a right but a privilege. A privilege reluctantly granted by those who control you.

Prior to the constitution or any other piece of paper a man simple acquired the arm of his choice and began to carry that tool. He did not ask any other man's permission to do this. He did not petition the masters that he himself put onto a throne by virtue of his ability to vote for his master.

The constitution has allowed those in power to infringe on your natural rights. Or it has been powerless in preventing the infringement of your natural rights. In either case, it is worthless except as an idol for many to worship. And since no man can serve two masters, the obvious conclusion is that most have regulated the Author of Freedom to second fiddle. You've decided that other men, speaking on your behalf that you chose, will be your master instead of the Creator. And in doing so you've sold your birthright of freedom for an illusion. You are not free like you think.

 

[Glocktogo]

I appreciate the conversation.

I do not think it is appropriate to put words into peope's mouths. I think it is cheap to make a winning point to say 'well you said', when in fact the person did not say that.

Like I said at first, this would not be a popular position. But it is mine only through experience of training the public many of who are novices with firearms and do not have your knowledge of firearms or self defense laws.

My point about licensing is that our society over many years feels certain things or professions serve the public good if licensed. Please do not put words into my mouth and say I meant so and so when the above sentence is what I meant and said.

Now,if you would like to go to an unlicensed dr. or dentist, that is your right.

Glocktogo said:

I'd just like to point out that simply because someone thinks they may be more qualified to comment on this subject than the rest of us, they aren't

Respectively I think you are wrong. Everyone has an opinion. But experience counts. A person that has been teaching this topic week after week learns things. Has some opinions reinforced and some opions are proven wrong. Just like a LEO gains eperience every month on the job, I do not have the LEOs knowledge, just like a veteran that has seen action has experience, others think they know about it but you don't until you spend the time doing it, just like in any job,experience teaches you things.

If experience counts, then stop marginalizing the experience of the seven states that have some level of Constitutional Carry which have not experienced an increase in the types of violations or abuses that you allude to. Yours is a statistical data set of one, which doesn't extend beyond your controlled environment. Excuse me if I value their practical experience more than your theoretical experience (and yes, classroom experience is theoretical).

You've also admitted that your primary income derives from training, which includes these government mandated classes. Regardless of what you profess, that has to factor into the weight given to your position. You have an undeniable vested interest in retaining government mandated classes. You may have other legitimate reasons for wanting them to remain a requirement, but that reason cannot be discounted in this discussion.

Further, there is no constitutional right to be a dentist, nor is there a requirement to allow them in your mouth. I'll just chalk that up to a horrible analogy on your part. On that point, there is no constitutional right for individuals to make money off the constitutional rights of others. I don't have a right to make money off you in exchange for a certificate that allows you to purchase a license to post your free speech on the internet. As someone else alluded to, more people have been killed as a result of exercising free speech than all the accidental shootings in the world.

Speaking to those rights, you've made attempts to add gravitas to your speech through the use of emotion based arguments. I don't need to put words in your mouth when you post things like this:

If your loved one is needlessly and carelessly killed by an untrained person, and while you are standing at the grave realize that you daughter's or son's life could have been spared if that person had been required to take a 7 hour course, then I feel you would opt to say you wished he had taken the training.

In the 2A debate, that type of argument is best left to the anti's. And finally:

So to state my opinion clearly again - I believe the 2nd Amendment gives everyone the right to be armed for self defense but I would like to see state required training before a person recieves their license. I belive in being practical especially after working with the untrained that a min amount of required training is a good thing. I do not believe EVERYONE should recieve a license just because they asked for one.

We expect our:
1. airplane pilots to be trained.
2. your bank teller to be trained
3. you a/c man to be trained
4. your police to be trained.
5. your county sheriffs to be trained.
6. your insurance man to be trained.
7. truck drivers to be trained.
8. your doctors to be trained.
9 your dentists to be trained.
and so on.

Are you stating that you want a person to be issued a handgun license without any required trainng?

In one paragraph you expose your own contradictions. You believe in the 2A right to keep and bear arms, but you want them to be licensed and subject to mandatory training in order to exercise that right. A right which you yourself say not everyone should be granted a license for, "just because they asked for one". I'd say you don't have a solid grasp on exactly what a constitutionally enumerated "right" is. In a nutshell, respectfully I think you are wrong.

I'll end with this nice little GIF:

Beyond that, 20 states have introduced CC bills. Coupled with the graphic above, that's what we in the business call "a clue". It's coming whether you like it or not. You might as well reconcile with it, because you're standing in the way of progress. The nattering naybobs of negativity will not win this one!

 

[Super Dave]

Cool GIF. Thanks!

I called his office after no replies. Someone is supposed to call me back tomorrow morning. I will post up asap.

 

[Super Dave]

Hey gang,

Just got of the phone with Senator Holt's aide. She said he had read the emails. and was gracious enough to let me ramble on about the way I thought things should be. She said he'd be calling or emailing me later.

She would not state his position on it, saying it was not hers to give, which I appreciated, but did say that I was the first constituent to contact him on this particular subject. So this is what I am thinking. Contact the senator in YOUR district. Tell them what we want. Be professional. Stay cool. Maybe we can become that squeaky wheel enough to get a bill in the works.

Don't sit on your rears reading this! Get up and DO something about it!

Here is a list of the Senate districts:

http://www.oksenate.gov/Senators/maps.htm

Here is the House:

http://www.okhouse.gov/Research/HouseDistricts.aspx



So what are you going to do about it? Sit there? If it is to be, it is up to me!

 

[lee1000]

Hey gang,

Just got of the phone with Senator Holt's aide. She said he had read the emails. and was gracious enough to let me ramble on about the way I thought things should be. She said he'd be calling or emailing me later.

She would not state his position on it, saying it was not hers to give, which I appreciated, but did say that I was the first constituent to contact him on this particular subject. So this is what I am thinking. Contact the senator in YOUR district. Tell them what we want. Be professional. Stay cool. Maybe we can become that squeaky wheel enough to get a bill in the works.

Don't sit on your rears reading this! Get up and DO something about it!

Here is a list of the Senate districts:

http://www.oksenate.gov/Senators/maps.htm

Here is the House:

http://www.okhouse.gov/Research/HouseDistricts.aspx



So what are you going to do about it? Sit there? If it is to be, it is up to me!

Do you know if OK2A has come out with anything on this? They are the ones that pushed through open carry.

 

[HiredHand]

Do you know if OK2A has come out with anything on this? They are the ones that pushed through open carry.

I think OK2A is working a few different angles before tackling constitutional carry.

 

[Super Dave]

Do you know if OK2A has come out with anything on this? They are the ones that pushed through open carry.

I know nothing about what OK2A is doing, but I'd like to. By what HiredHand stated, it sounds like they are not at this time, but I sure couldn't tell you. I am not currently a part of anything like that. I'm just a registered voter that is fed up, and wants change. The way I figure it, change doesn't happen from hoping someone will do it. It comes from doing it. I think the next thing will be a petition in my district. My Senator's aide said he is big on what his constituents want. If the majority of his constituents want Constitutional carry, I am hoping he will do something about it.

So who else here lives in Senate district 30, and wants to do something about it, instead of sitting around wishing?

 

[ProBusiness]

Glocktogo:

So you are saying, when a student in a class points a gun at someone it is theoretical? No sir, respectfully, that is real.