Governor Stitt Signs the Bill: Oklahoma is now a 2A Sanctuary

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

JR777

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 4, 2020
Messages
385
Reaction score
364
Location
Downtown Oklahoma City
It seems it could have been written more clearly, but I think this part "...on or after the effective date of this act;" is referring to our act, not the NFA. I'd be impressed if they intended to supplant the NFA, but I doubt anyone is sticking their head up that high..
Yea I think I got ahead of myself. Should have kept reading...

2. "Infringement" shall mean any law that reduces, represses, diminishes or subverts the right to keep and bear arms, ammunition, parts and accessories in any amount that is legal as of the effective date of this act of any citizen in this state; and

Looks like it only applies to future laws, making it as useful as tits on a boar. These guys ought to be ashamed of themselves for posturing like this. It means NOTHING, and it's a waste of their time and our money. This is purely for brownie points for their reelection campaigns and nothing else.
 

JR777

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 4, 2020
Messages
385
Reaction score
364
Location
Downtown Oklahoma City
Good news is this would likely cover the pending 80% and brace ban.
Probably not, because that's an existing law, and reading the last page it looks like they define "infringement" as only applying to laws made after the act.

The thing about the braces is they're not banning them, they're just saying that you can't use one to manufacture an SBR. And if you're going from the assumption that the NFA is legal, which this act apparently is, then it wouldn't stop the ATF from going after many if not most pistol braced firearms. There are a scant few that got ATF approval early on, but those were the very early ones that came configured from the factory, and had almost zero utility as a stock, vs. the currently ones that are for all intents and purposes an actual stock.
 

MilitantBEEMER

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Mar 9, 2019
Messages
3,930
Reaction score
7,442
Location
Tulsa Oklahoma
To my knowledge we currently do not have laws on the books banning pistol braces or 80% components. I would think that this law would cover those if the xiden admin and AFT decide to ban. All that being said, I could be wrong. I usually am... :)
 

JR777

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 4, 2020
Messages
385
Reaction score
364
Location
Downtown Oklahoma City
To my knowledge we currently do not have laws on the books banning pistol braces or 80% components. I would think that this law would cover those if the xiden admin and AFT decide to ban. All that being said, I could be wrong. I usually am... :)
It's a long convoluted story, but the short version is they're already illegal.

Very early on, the ATF approved a few specific models on a few specific firearms, in a specific configuration. Then people ran with that and said oh we can now put this brace on any AR pistol and it's approved. Well, no, that's not how it works, but the manufacturers told people that. When all the ATF ever said is that in their opinion this specific brace wasn't an SBR on that specific gun, as it was configured when submitted to them.

Unfortunately a lot of people in the industry pretty much lied about getting ATF approval for their products. In some cases, they got denied approval, and then claimed the opposite.

So what the ATF is saying is that no new laws or anything are needed, because the majority of the braced firearms out there are actually SBRs. And they have extremely good standing to argue that. Some of these newer braces I'm seeing you honestly can't even tell they're braces just by looking at them. They're basically stocks that can, in theory, fold out to be a brace.

Again, the ATF nor the oval office is proposing a ban, as far as I know. They're just saying that you can't put a random brace on a random short barreled upper and automatically assume that it's legal to do so.
 

MilitantBEEMER

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Mar 9, 2019
Messages
3,930
Reaction score
7,442
Location
Tulsa Oklahoma
According to OK2A, anything after 1968 is null and void in OK. It also goes into effect immediately. At least that is how I read it?
567C7C30-9A05-403D-813B-05396B7E3E1E.jpeg
 
Last edited:

JR777

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 4, 2020
Messages
385
Reaction score
364
Location
Downtown Oklahoma City
According to OK2A, anything after 1968 is null and void in OK. It also goes into effect immediately. At least that is how I read it?
View attachment 203317
That would include the NFA tax on MGs, but exclude the 86 Hughes Amendment banning them outright. So I guess I just send the ATF 200 dollars and tell them the Hughes Amendment no longer applies to me?:uhh:
 

MacFromOK

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
13,759
Reaction score
14,757
Location
Southern Oklahoma
If that's the case, would bumpstocks be protected too? Lol, like anyone could find/afford ammo for 'em. :D

I'm thinkin' there's gonna be a lot of misinformation regarding this bill. Where are all the lawyer members when ya need one... :anyone:
 

JR777

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
May 4, 2020
Messages
385
Reaction score
364
Location
Downtown Oklahoma City
If that's the case, would bumpstocks be protected too? Lol, like anyone could find/afford ammo for 'em. :D

I'm thinkin' there's gonna be a lot of misinformation regarding this bill. Where are all the lawyer members when ya need one... :anyone:
Same thing as the braces. They're claiming they're machineguns. So if that's allowed to stand, then...well like I said, I guess send in your 200 dollars on a Form 1 and just politely inform the ATF that the Hughes Amendment no longer applies to you, and would they kindly reopen the registry thank you very much.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom