Three people turned away from Gathering Place after bringing firearms

[Billybob]

I can be kicked out of any place that has a gun buster sign. Nothing new. It's not a crime unless you act like a jackwagon and want to prove some point, then it becomes a trespass misdemeanor.
Conceal Carry away bro!

You can't be kicked out of a public park for it as evidenced by Spencer getting the signs taken down because they were in violation of state law. Again the issue is whether it's a public park or private property. If it's public allow legal carry, if it's private then the taxpayers should be reimbursed for their money that's been put in to make it possible and no more public funds should be used for it in any way, remove it from River Parks ownership and let Kaiser's LLC. completely fund it.
And while I agree in principle with your comment about "conceal carry" imagine your at the park with kids and wife enjoying a wonderful day and are carrying because it's your right and let's face it you're in a very high crime area. Then some anti gun busy body spots you printing and freaks out because you're endangering her little kid. Then you can either cancel the family's day or go leave your gun in your vehicle in a high crime area or maybe have to take the shuttle back to where you parked and leave it there, all because somebody has decided rights are trumped by feelings/ideology.

 

[crrcboatz]

A private park supported and maintained by a private trust for public use. Seems pretty simple,live by their rules or leave!

 

[Billybob]

A private park supported and maintained by a private trust for public use. Seems pretty simple,live by their rules or leave!

A public park owned by a public/private trust that gets the majority of funding from taxpayers. A public park leased to a LLC that is owned by the same public/private trust that expects free water utilities and if like the bridge agreement expects the city to pay for major expenses like capital improvements(what about major repairs?). Again how can it be private being owned by River Parks and getting the advantage of public funds?

 

[Ignored Member]

And once again we have some Jackass showing the world the cliche image of M.A.G.A. gun toting idiots.

Good job Tim Harper. You make us all look bad.

 

[GlockPride]

Did the park construction utilize at least $1 of taxpayer money? If so, then it’s a public park.

 

[GlockPride]

There are signs on every "public" street/highway saying the speed limit is a certain level, and I suspect everyone here, not only drives on those roads, but may even exceed that stated limit from time to time.

Save the outrage for something worthy. Just go enjoy the beautiful park. If you carry, keep it concealed and of asked to leave, do it without making a scene.

Life can actually be enjoyable, and pretty darn easy.

That’s not the point. The point is if the city is violating state law by trying to revoke your God-given right to self defense? That’s what we are trying to answer.

 

[JD8]

There are signs on every "public" street/highway saying the speed limit is a certain level, and I suspect everyone here, not only drives on those roads, but may even exceed that stated limit from time to time.

Save the outrage for something worthy. Just go enjoy the beautiful park. If you carry, keep it concealed and of asked to leave, do it without making a scene.

Life can actually be enjoyable, and pretty darn easy.

This is OSA sir. We must remain cynical and unhappy.

 

[JD8]

That's all well and good but it took tax dollars to make it happen, they want free water utilities, it's likely River Parks(tax funded) will pay for capital improvements and possibly major repairs so is it a public park where applicable state law applies or is it a private park where they get to make the rules? If gun owners can be discriminated against can others also be discriminated against? Will only certain concerts and events be allowed as opposed to open and equal to all?

Nope. Try again. The trust pays for the upkeep and repairs. I believe the park is privately owned but "leased" to Riverparks. Don't like it? Concealed is concealed or don't go. Either way the guy in the OP is a douche. Either it seems you need to clarify or educate yourself on all the funding and legal entities at hand. You seem to be misinformed on the maintenance. Otherwise, put your money where you mouth is and sue Kaiser and the city.

 

[tRidiot]

What would be the point of us lobbying for our legislature (and useless governator) to pass laws if we just let private enterprises and municipalities stomp all over them and don't bring attention to it?

No one is talking about a sit in, or violent resistance, or marching on Washington wearing pink body organ hats, chanting about how we hate the establishment.

Seriously, everyone here has advocated following the law. The law as written. The law as intended.

If George Kaiser and ilk can flaunt the law because they have enough money, then what's the point of the law? What if the OHP officer who pulls you over decides you need to be disarmed for no reason, in spite of the fact you are following the law and there is no concern for danger? In spite of the state law that says you cannot be disarmed by law enforcement without a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing or danger to himself? What if there is ONE OHP officer out there who works more traffic stops than any other in the state, but he ROUTINELY removes the firearms of any permitted, law-abiding citizen he comes across simply on principle, despite what the law says about his right to do so?

Would that be a problem for anyone? I mean, it's not HURTING you to have your gun pulled out of your trousers and taken back to his cruiser while he writes you a ticket, right? Or any of the other multitude of people whom are subjected to the same treatment? So then what's the harm, the state law doesn't really mean anything, right?

 

[SMS]

Seems pretty simple. A group of concerned Tulsans should take the issue to court. Where’s the ORA and/or the OK2A?