Open carry being considered again in OK

[tulsamal]

I lived in Oregon 10 yrs, we had an open carry law there, I never carried my weapon in plain sight,
I've always carried concealed.

Certainly that's your option. Nobody is going to force you to do any open carry. I probably wouldn't go to the high density parts of Tulsa with open carry either. But I live in Craig County. 15,000 people in the whole county. And I live on 90 acres. When I'm working on and around the property, I always carry a handgun. Unless it is winter and I'm wearing a heavy coat, it is always easier to open carry. But it never ceases to annoy me that I can't leave my property that way. My gravel road is five miles from the nearest town but I went for a walk down the road with a flap holster on my side and ended up in the dying cockroach position, face in the gravel, and a Glock pointed at my head for my temerity. After the deputy was done threatening to shoot me (repeatedly) and actually accepted the bizarre idea that I wasn't a crazed maniac, he told me not to do that anymore since OK didn't allow for open carry. Even in highly rural areas.

I keep hoping open carry will pass before I die. And looking at those other bills, it would also be nice if I could mail a package at the local Post Office without having to strip off my gun and leave it in the car! Or carry concealed at a college class. Or (gasp) walk up to the door of my children's school with a concealed firearm without worrying about getting "caught" and losing my permit!

Gregg

 

[inactive]

Carrying a pistol openly does not meet the definition of "brandishing".

You beat me to it...


bran·dish (brndsh)
tr.v. bran·dished, bran·dish·ing, bran·dish·es
1. To wave or flourish (a weapon, for example) menacingly.
2. To display ostentatiously.

[threadjack]

I'm looking right at the second definition, which fits quite well IMHO.

[/threadjack]

I'm of a similar opinion. I would never carry other than concealed, but fully support the right to do so. It's a very personal choice.

 

[XPerties]

I believe we should have the right to open carry but personally I don't think I would open carry. I have issues with people looking or judging me by my looks (tattooed, shaved head, 6'2, 295) and adding a firearm on my side in plain sight would just add to their views but I do hope it passes so in those certain situations where you might be concealed and your shirt pops up accidentally you wouldn't be held in violation.

 

[vvvvvvv]

But it never ceases to annoy me that I can't leave my property that way.

You really can't even open carry on your own property. In fact, to carry a loaded handgun outside the threshold of your home itself is illegal without a permit.

[threadjack]

I'm looking right at the second definition, which fits quite well IMHO.

[/threadjack]

The definition referenced in every court case I've read that involved "brandishing" is the first one.

 

[inactive]

Altenhofel, do you ever talk in the vernacular?

 

[vvvvvvv]

Altenhofel, do you ever talk in the vernacular?

I only speak in a manner that most thoroughly, clearly, and efficiently (or the best combination of those for the intended audience) gets the correct point across.

 

[Red Dirt]

I detect some back peddling on her part.

Michael[/QUOTE]




I kinda feel the same way, but I really think that she has said too much about signing it in public to back down. The real dead-end, as others have already said, is going to be getting the wishy-washy representatives to knuckle down and do it like they should. Thank God both my senator and representative are in favor of freedom.

 

[vvvvvvv]

I really think that she has said too much about signing it in public to back down.

That's why she "clarified" her position. In 2011, the identical bill that was considered the most responsible form of open carry by Republicans in 2010 was considered irresponsibly unrestrictive by many of the same Republicans in 2011. It was a set up so that she can veto the minimally acceptable version and claim that it wasn't "responsible" to sign it.

That said, the House and the Senate will protect her so she won't have to sign or veto it. After all, she needs to be re-elected in 2014, right?

 

[Red Dirt]

That said, the House and the Senate will protect her so she won't have to sign or veto it. After all, she needs to be re-elected in 2014, right?[/QUOTE]


Very true, I doubt that we will ever find out if she will be true to her word thanks to our wonderful "pro-gun" backsliders in the legislature.

 

[Werewolf]

My biggest fear that if it passes will businesses that don't want guns visable in their stores post "No Guns Allowed" signs.

Their loss.

FWIW: When concealed carry became law in OK lots of businesses posted no gun signs. Most were gone within the first year or so.