Oklahoma Rifle Association ORA opposes open carry

[DirtyDawg]

Turncoats....

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=298&articleid=20110322_298_0_OLHMIY200522

ORA President Don Scott says ..............."that allowing citizens to carry rifles and shotguns into businesses or on the street will create "an atmosphere of hostility and distrust."

ORA needs to remove all references to the 2nd Amendment from its website.

 

[Jack T.]

Month or so back the Executive Director said that the ORA members were "split on the issue of open carry."

With friends like that. . .

 

[SMS]

Sounds like the ORA is determined to make the organization even more irrelevent than they already are...that's unfortunate.

 

[bulbboy]

This is why I don't think we will ever get everything we true 2nd Amend supporters want. People supposedly on our side can't agree. We have people on this site against open carry - that should tell you something..

 

[jcizzle]

I joined the NRA last night online and looked up the ORA too. Almost signed up for them too and decided to learn a little more about them first. Glad I didn't jump into membership with them. Decision made. I won't be joining.

BTW... are there any good local (OKC area) groups to join where members actively meet up, do some self defense type training & shooting and such?

 

[1shot(bob)]

My response to the assinine remark went thusly:

Please tell me you were misquoted by the Tulsa World. Surely you did not say "allowing citizens to carry rifles and shotguns into businesses or on the street will create "an atmosphere of hostility and distrust." Scott also cited concerns that law enforcement officers have with the proposal."
I thought this was an organization that supported the second amendment as stated on your home page.
If this is your idea of support, please stop supporting our 2A rights.
What part of the 2A do you not understand?

We'll see if they respond.

 

[DirtyDawg]

I wrote an e-mail to the president of the ORA, Don Scott, about 1.5 hours ago. Apparently, he didn't have intelligence to respond to me directly, so he had his vice president Dale Schuster respond. This is all it said:

"I suggest you study Senate Bill 129 by Russell then go to the McCarville report to read the letter in it's entirity."

I quickly replied. Dirty Dawg.

 

[1shot(bob)]

I got the same reply.
Here is the McCarville Report article:

Rifle Association Opposes Open Carry Measure; Russell Says Group's Position 'Irresponsible'

The Oklahoma Rifle Association's board of directors is out with a letter to House members stating its opposition to Senator Steve Russell's open carry proposal, Senate Bill 129. It's a move that Russell says disappoints him and despite the ORA's oppostion, he expects the bill to pass.

"It was the intent of the Oklahoma Rifle Association to remain in a position of neutrality on the 'Open Carry' legislation as many of our members support some form of open carry," ORA President Don Scott and Legislative Director Paul W. Abel wrote.

"The Officers and Board Members of the ORA are in agreement with the 'Open Carry' concept but, after much discussion, the majority of the Board Members and Officers voted to oppose Senate Bill 129.... This bill, in its present form, would allow those 18 years of age and older, to purchase and carry loaded rifles, shotguns and handguns openly in a scabbard, with a sling, or a handgun in a holster, anywhere not in violation of Title 21, subsection A of Section 1277, without a background check and without training.

"The Officers and Board Members are in opposition to SB 129 for these reasons:

"First, the purchase of handguns by persons under the age of 21 is in violation of existing federal law.

"Second, allowing citizens, trained or untrained, to carry rifles and shotguns either in a scabbard or with a sling on city streets and into business establishments will create an atmosphere of hostility and distrust, not to mention create fear in those in our society who have an aversion to any type of firearm.

"Third, the apprehension, created for the law enforcement officers by the open carrying of long guns could create situations resulting in unnecessary use of deadly force.

"For these reasons we ask you to vote against SB 129 when it comes to the floor of the House of Representatives."

Russell told The McCarville Report Online he finds the ORA position "irresponsible for a group claiming to support the 2nd Amendment."

He said he has never been contacted about the bill, nor was he asked for his view of how it might appear in final form, or asked to express any concerns or opinions he has.

He said the ORA objections come before the bill is finalized and before it has undergone the "full legislative process."

Russell said he is working on three issues related to the bill, including the age factor, the training level that could be similar to a hunter safety course with certification of training and the "reciprocity" issue (with other states), which has to be handled properly and "kept separately" from the state's concealed carry law.

I will now write my response to the ORA.

 

[getchurgun]

It seems that the America I grew up knowing and loving is on its way out. What a shame, people who run ORA do not know how to read the Constitution. I don't believe that I, as a law abiding citizen, should even have to ask the government whether I can open carry or not.

 

[1shot(bob)]

My response to Dale Schuster:

Dale,
Thank you for your speedy response.
I read the McCarville report. I still don't get it.
I have also read most of the bill.

"First, the purchase of handguns by persons under the age of 21 is in violation of existing federal law.

Incorrect. Any person 18 years or older may purchase a handgun from an individual (private party) or receive one as a gift from a parent. If I am wrong please cite the specific law I am missing.

"Second, allowing citizens, trained or untrained, to carry rifles and shotguns either in a scabbard or with a sling on city streets and into business establishments will create an atmosphere of hostility and distrust, not to mention create fear in those in our society who have an aversion to any type of firearm.

And your point would be? My 2A rights are not dependent on other people's fears of me exercising them. If it bothers them that I carry, so be it. What statistical evidence can you provide to show this is true any way?
Which other rights should I sacrifice because others may be 'scared', 'hostile', or 'distrustful' when I do so?

"Third, the apprehension, created for the law enforcement officers by the open carrying of long guns could create situations resulting in unnecessary use of deadly force.

If this is so we need better training for our law enforcement officers, not abridged Second Amendment rights for citizens.

"For these reasons we ask you to vote against SB 129 when it comes to the floor of the House of Representatives."

What part of SB 129 violates any law or reading of the Second Amendment? Aren't you just playing politics?

Russell told The McCarville Report Online he finds the ORA position "irresponsible for a group claiming to support the 2nd Amendment."

Russell is correct. What you are doing is supporting 'common sense gun laws' which have nothing to do with the second amendment. For this you should be ashamed.

Again, please quit calling yourself a Second Amendment organization if you aren't going to uphold the entire amendment. We have enough people already calling for 'common sense' gun laws. We don't need our 'friends' doing it also.