OK, thanks. Must be just me then - that's where I thought I could go, but I'm not able to access it right now - looks like an ISP issue...grr.
OK, thanks. Must be just me then - that's where I thought I could go, but I'm not able to access it right now - looks like an ISP issue...grr.
For what it's worth, I'm currently working on a project that will give you the same information, but in an easier to access and more thorough way. I should have it done soon... just adding all the bills.
Looking foward to see what you have put together
Although I don't think all of this will pass, I do believe we will see something happen this year. There is momentum with Gov. Fallin coming into office who publicly stated she would support open carry. What will happen here is all these bills will go into a committee where they will cuss and discuss what to do with it all. If all goes well, out will come a consolidated version that they believe will pass both houses, and get the governors signature. I didn't want to flood the forums with all the exact text of each of these bills, but basically, they each modify the current SDA with the modifications I mentioned in my initial post. None of these appear to be NEW laws, just modifying the existing one.
Here are the parts I "think" will make it through:
1) Open Carry for handgun permit holders - This has been a long drawn out battle and it did actually pass last year, plus missed overriding the governors veto by only a small margin. Combined with the fact that this was on Gov. Fallin's website, I think if nothing else makes it, this will.
2) Removing Technology centers and professional sporting events from the list of prohibited places. These two never really made sense anyway.
3) College carry - There seems to be a small, but strengthening push for this nation-wide. I think it will pass.
4) People probably won't care as much about this, but I think the fee removal might make it through.
5) Adding a misdemeanor drug conviction to list of temporary preclusions for a handgun license probably will make it through to appease the small voice of gun control advocates in Oklahoma. Although, I think 10 years is probably a bit excessive here.
I don't think there is enough political will power right now to pass full open carry without a permit, (Known as constitutional carry) nor do I think they will remove government buildings and meetings from the list of prohibited places. I could be wrong, but allowing citizens to carry weapons in a court house, city hall, or school board meeting will not sit well with judges and mayors, unless they were to add language that gives the option to allow or not in individual buildings, such as it is right now with private businesses. If you remove the current restrictions, then unlike a private business that can just ask you to leave, the law could be interpreted to require all government buildings in Oklahoma to allow both open and concealed carry.
I wonder if it would be more successful to simply add the phrase "shall not be a criminal act" to the SDA? That way they can say it is still prohibited, but you do not risk felony if you choose to carry anyways. It might sell better than out right taking govt. buildings off the prohibited list.
In all honesty, I would rather see what I just mentioned passed than open carry. I'm not opposed to open carry by any means but on the hierarchy of goals I think protecting CWP holders comes in above open carry.
I didn't read that closely enough. I don't support that one passing at all.
Keep misdemeanors out of the second amendment.
I'm not expecting it to. The same people still control the committee. The only reason it got out last time was to get votes in November. My gut tells me that some of those who didn't flip on the override didn't flip because they knew that enough others that could better afford the political risk would.
That won't pass either. Phil Berkenbile seems to have a lot of pull on anything that deals with CareerTech, from my observation. As for professional sporting events, I have a feeling that the NBA won't agree.
Out of what you've mentioned, I think this has the most chance, albeit a slim one, but it's at least a little better than a snowball's chance in hell.
Not at all. Everyone needs to collect their fees, and they definitely won't be willing to give them up.
Sadly, I think this will pass, but not for gun control advocates. No, politicians in Oklahoma feel that they need to appear tough on crime, especially Republicans when it comes to drugs and other vices and victimless crimes. If this looks like it starts to gain traction, I'll definitely be my Representative's new shadow.
I share some of Veggie meat's pessimism, but I also believe we can get things done here, unlike the more "progressive" states.
We need to be vigilant (the price of freedom is eternal vigilance), civil but communicative with our new reps (please support these bills, etc), and in the next election let the new bums know they can be thrown out as easily as the old 'uns.
In other words keep an eye out for which rep supports what, and vote...vote...vote the next time.
We need to be vigilant (the price of freedom is eternal vigilance), civil but communicative with our new reps (please support these bills, etc), and in the next election let the new bums know they can be thrown out as easily as the old 'uns.
In other words keep an eye out for which rep supports what, and vote...vote...vote the next time.
Veggie,
Although I perhaps can see some of your points, no one ever thought in a million years that the late Ted Kennedy's seat in the Senate would be filled by a Republican either, but look what happened. Bottom line is, those who keep the view that our rights cannot ever be restored because politicians will always be motivated by special interest groups are fooling themselves into thinking they don't have the power. If you EVER had a doubt in your mind that the power rests ultimately with the people, then you must have hidden in a cave during the mid-term elections. As far as your comment that the NBA might oppose the section removing professional sporting events from prohibited places, they probably will. However, let's get it removed from the law. It doesn't make sense. If the Thunder doesn't want weapons in the facility while they play carried by law-abiding citizens, they can pay for metal detectors and ask anyone carrying to leave, just like any other private entity has the right to do. Why make it a part of state law?? Then we have a choice to not support their games voluntarily, rather than making it against the law.
We have a first-time woman governor, whether you agree with all she has to say or not. Also for the first time in state history, Republicans control both houses and the governor's chair at the SAME time. If you don't think "We the people..." did that, then think again. Yes, all that occurred on the national stage with health care contributed to that significantly. But my point is, we have become too lax into thinking there is nothing we can do to change things. Keep in mind, that our 2nd amendment rights weren't taken away all at once. Nor will they be restored all at once. It does take time. But what I can say with an absolute certainty, is that if you choose to sit on the side lines and not contact your representative, and not vote at the ballot, then I don't think you have a right to continue to complain that our rights being taken away. You are allowing them to be taken away by not taking action.
Who says the NRA has to be the ONLY voice here?? I read one post where the NRA seems disinterested in the entire thing. Perhaps they are...but do YOU not have a phone?? I know everyone here has internet cause you can make your opinion known on this forum. How about making your voice heard in OKC by email?? I have a feeling after this last round of elections, politicians will be a bit more interested in hearing from the people than they have in the past.
I'm not saying wait until you "think" any of these bills "might" gain traction. I'm saying do it now! Or do you just jump on a bandwagon when things are looking rosy?
The 2011 session of the Oklahoma legislature starts on February 7th. No matter what part of these bills I've mentioned that you agree or disagree with, it's important that OKC hear all of us. I doubt many of them read this forum, so complaining here probably won't do much there.
Too bad they don't try and to remove the prohibited use of suppressors from the hunting regulations. I am not just talking about use for landowners only, I am talking about for anyone who wishes to hunt with one.
Oklahoma needs to get with the numerous other states and let suppressors be used for hunting. Hell, Arkansas allows suppressors as well as FA rifles. I bet there is no substantial difference in the number of poaching cases between AR and OK.
Oklahoma needs to get with the numerous other states and let suppressors be used for hunting. Hell, Arkansas allows suppressors as well as FA rifles. I bet there is no substantial difference in the number of poaching cases between AR and OK.
Similar threads
