Reply to Thread

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

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tagillespie" data-source="post: 1491784" data-attributes="member: 9732">There has been much discussion about the open carry discharge petition and OK2A.  I haven't been on OSA for a while due to time contraints, so I apoligize for this not being more timely to the flow of the discussion, but I would like to clear things up a bit.In February, after the House leadership blocked a chage to their rules that would have helped get good 2A legislation through the chamber, we knew we needed to do something to force the issue.  Three people currenlty have complete control over the fate of every bill: the chairman of the committee the bill is assigned to, the Floor Leader, and the Speaker.  It is the same in the Senate.  Until we break up this oligarchy, it is going to mean more frustration every year as we try again and again to pass good legislation.  This was the first purpose of the discharge petition.  This petition was kicked off by a group of around 20 conservative grassroots organizations from around the state.  We discussed several different bills, ranging from an ad valorem tax cut, to open carry.  We decided to use HB1400, a "traditional" unlicensed open carry bill.  However, the author of the bill asked that we not use his bill because he hoped to get Sue Tibbs to hear the bill in committee.  Tibbs was never going to hear his bill, but we had to honor his wishes.  The problem we faced was waiting for the committee deadline to pass would have meant we would possibly run out of time trying to get the signatures on the discharge petition so we chose another bill.  It came down to HB1470 or HB1647.  The author of HB1647 was already on board with the effort and, since 1470 was licensed, we chose 1647.  From the beginning, the plan was to clean the language up once we got it moving through the process.For example, Senator Russell had introduced SB856, an unlicensed open carry bill.  Sen. Barrington refused to hear it, so Senator Russell amended it into a completely different bill.  Then, on the floor, Senator Russell added his open carry language back into another bill, SB129.  As bills move through the process, it is not difficult to clean them up, and sometimes even change them completely.  We were never going to be satisfied with the language as it was, partly because of some of the conerns that have been voiced in this forum: the burden of proving reasonable fear of bodily harm.Several Representatives were instrumental in helping.  Rep. Bennett, as the author of the bill, worked hard to get the freshmen Republicans on board.  Reps. Ritze, Terrill, Reynolds, Key, Derby, and others were helpful.  Also, Reps. Inman and Procter were influental with the Democrat caucus.  The organizations that carried the water were OK2A, the High Noon Club, John Birch Society, OCPAC, Reclaiming Oklahoma for Christ, OKC Tea Party, and a few others.  Also, Kaye Beach was a big help.As for OK2A, we would have loved to see Rep Tibbs hear HB1400 and Sen Barrington to hear SB856.  That wasn't going to happen.  We would have loved to use HB1400 for the petition - that was our initial plan - but that didn't work out.  The best option was 1647.  If SB129 doesn't come out of the House Public Safety Committee, we will work to clean up the language in HB1647 while it is in the Senate.  We actually still have a strong chance to pass unlicensed open carry before the session is over in May.  The next hurdle will be the Governor.  She has said she would sign it, but she sure hasn't helped move it through the process, so I have my doubts.Tim GillespieDirector,OK2A</blockquote>

Verification