What if it originated in the senate?
Doesn't matter. It goes back to whichever house it originated from, be it the House of Representatives or the Senate. If it passes in that house it goes to the other house to be reconsidered. If it passes in the that second house it becomes law.
Woody
I called my Rep & Senator, Bingman, and Hickman. Had to leave a VM at Sen. Bingman's office. Leader Hickman's office said they have received "a lot of these calls" today.
Good deal... it passed by more than a 2/3 majority in both houses, so assuming no turncloak changes his colors, it should be an easy override.
Yep. If they'll just have the vote.
Of course, Bingman is also the one who's sh!tt!ing $25M into the Oklahoma Pop Museum, so he's exhibiting his capacity to do stupid things too.
Of course, Bingman is also the one who's sh!tt!ing $25M into the Oklahoma Pop Museum, so he's exhibiting his capacity to do stupid things too.
The bill is misrepresented in this piece as well (if I'm reading the final version as sent to Fallin correctly).
I'm still pretty confused...I'm not calling anyone just yet LOL.
Fallin needs her face slapped. I don't care what her political party is. I am a republican but I don't side with others just because they have an R next to their name. That don't mean a dang thing these days. I believe there aren't but a few in our government that are actually for the constitution and our rights. What a sad time to be alive.
While I've been aware of SB41 for several months I'm not the resident expert on it. I do think I see how the reference to the Norman music festival could be confusing. I do not see how the bill was misrepresented by Don Spencer in the McCarville Report. After reading SDA 1277 and the final version of SB41 it IS clear that the OKC Chamber is misrepresenting the bill.
The bill as I see it:
1 - Introduced to clean up language such as "projectiles" in place of "projectile." For example, firing 410 shells with multiple projectiles from a Taurus Judge in a self defense situation or the use of a "weapon" instead of a "pistol." Original intent of bill as I see it was pretty simple clean up of the language.
2 - 1290.22, paragraph C
MY reading of this (I'm not a lawyer): Private businesses can prohibit the carry of firearms in their business. Private businesses/vendors doing business in a park, recreational area, or fairgrounds, where firearm carry is not prohibited cannot prohibit the legal carrying of firearms. In other words, the rules applicable to places in 1277 can't change because a private business using that area wants them to. Places that were off limits to carry before still are.
3 - Relevance to the Norman Festival as I see it with my limited legal expertise: I think for Norman to lease a street, the street would fall under the description of a "park, recreational area, or fairgrounds." Otherwise, how can a city lease a public street for private use?
That was the basis of my question in the beginning. Is a city street defined as a recreation area? I don't think so. To flatly declare that this law, as written, protects all public areas doesn't make sense because the law clearly only points to the existing exemption for parks, fairgrounds, and recreation areas.
Like I said before though, if all it did was clear up the long standing confusion over things like the State Fair, it's still a good thing....as long as we don't create more ambiguity in the process.
They should have also added something to the effect of "public streets and walkways" to the specifically excluded list . That would have taken care of the Norman festival.
