Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: OCDO Press Rel. - Oklahoma Police-State Style “License Checks” Will Not Be Tolerated!

  1. #1
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,615

    OCDO Press Rel. - Oklahoma Police-State Style “License Checks” Will Not Be Tolerated!

    OpenCarry.org

    (A pro-gun Internet community of over 28,000 registered members)

    For Immediate Release – June 3, 2012
    ---------
    OpenCarry.org Welcomes Oklahoma as America’s 44th Open Carry State

    But Police-State Style “License Checks” Will Not Be Tolerated
    ---------

    OpenCarry.org’s 28,000+ members join the Oklahoma Second Amendment Association (OK2A) in welcoming Oklahoma as America’s 44th open carry state. Though we are disappointed that the Oklahoma legislature saw fit to require a license to open carry, this reform is still a great step forward for freedom and self-defense rights.

    But we are also alarmed that some Oklahoma law enforcement officials seem ready to hijack the license requirement as an excuse to violate gun owners Fourth Amendment rights. For example,

    “Midwest City police will check for permits when they encounter someone openly carrying a gun” [chortles] Assistant Chief Sid Porter. ‘When public safety comes up, that is No. 1,’ Porter said. ‘If we see someone carrying a weapon in a holster, they have to have a permit on them and would be asked to show it. Anybody with a weapon on their side is considered a suspicious person.’”

    OpenCarry.org co-founder and spokesperson John Pierce says that it “sure looks like some Oklahoma police officials have missed the boat” on basic Second and Fourth Amendment concepts. “Earth to Oklahoma police: In the United States, guns are not contraband, and gun ownership is not suspicious,” adds Pierce.

    OpenCarry.org and OK2A join in urging Oklahoma Attorney General E. Scott Pruitt along with all Oklahoma county sheriffs and city police chiefs to ensure that all Oklahoma law enforcement officers are reminded that gun, or no gun, the Fourth amendment requires at least “reasonable articulable suspicion” of crime afoot before they may seize any a person. And this goes for license checks as well.

    The US Supreme Court held in Delaware v. Prouse (440 U.S. 648) (1979)

    “that, except in those situations in which there is at least articulable and reasonable suspicion that a motorist is unlicensed or that an automobile is not registered, or that either the vehicle or an occupant is otherwise subject to seizure for violation of law, stopping an automobile and detaining the driver in order to check his driver's license and the registration of the automobile are unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.”

    Applying Prouse and Terry to Oklahoma’s new open carry law, the police may not seize or detain open carriers just to demand production of a license to carry.
    Police officials must review Fourth Amendment basics “before open carry becomes legal on November 1,” warns Tim Gillespie, Director and Founder of the Oklahoma Second Amendment Association (OK2A). “We will be watching the police, and if need be, we will conduct open carry freedom of movement exercises and file lawsuits if we detect unconstitutional practices aimed at chilling the right to open carry.”

    Carry on!

    ###

    Media Contacts:
    John Pierce, co-founder and spokesperson, OpenCarry.org
    Tim Gillespie, Oklahoma Second Amendment Association, http://ok2a.org
    Attached Files Attached Files

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,311


    Excellent.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    2,918
    Assistant Chief Sid Porter. "... Anybody with a weapon on their side is considered a suspicious person. Err, I mean, uh, anybody with a weapon on their side who's not wearing a shiny tin badge is considered a suspicious person, I mean. Obviously just because a cop carries the same gun that a lawfully carrying person might carry doesn't make him suspicious. That'd just be silly,... right?"

    Is there a presumption of lawful conduct in Oklahoma in regards to carrying a legal firearm?
    Does Oklahoma law require one to present his/her firearms license upon demand?
    And is there a penalty for not doing so?
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 06-05-2012 at 11:02 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    1,584
    Very good.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    581
    Hence why it's a good idea to set your phones voice recorder up and or buy a small pocket voice recorder for any LEO interaction. Your word against there's can go a long way with a voice recording if you ended up in court.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Springfield Smitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    OKC, OK (Heading back to MI very soon - thank goodness)
    Posts
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Is there a presumption of lawful conduct in Oklahoma in regards to carrying a legal firearm?
    Does Oklahoma law require one to present his/her firearms license upon demand?
    And is there a penalty for not doing so?
    This answers the second two-thirds of your question:

    Section 1290.8.B "The person shall be required to have possession of his or her valid handgun license and a valid Oklahoma driver license or an Oklahoma State photo identification at all times when in possession of an authorized pistol. The person shall display the handgun license on demand of a law enforcement officer; provided, however, that in the absence of reasonable and articulable suspicion of other criminal activity, an individual carrying an unconcealed handgun shall not be disarmed or physically restrained unless the individual fails to display a valid handgun license in response to that demand. Any violation of the provisions of this subsection may be punishable as a criminal offense as authorized by Section 1272 of this title or pursuant to any other applicable provision of law. In addition to any criminal prosecution which may result from not carrying the handgun license and the required identification with the authorized pistol as required by the provisions of this subsection, the person may be subject to an administrative fine for violation of the provisions of this subsection. The administrative fine shall be Fifty Dollars ($50.00) and shall be assessed by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation after a hearing and determination that the licensee is in violation of the provisions of this subsection. Any second or subsequent violation of the provisions of this subsection shall be grounds for the Bureau to suspend the handgun license for a period of six (6) months, in addition to any other penalty imposed.

    Upon the arrest of any person for a violation of the provisions of this subsection, the person may show proof to the court that a valid handgun license and the other required identification has been issued to such person and the person may state any reason why the handgun license or the other required identification was not carried by the person as required by the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act. The court shall dismiss an alleged violation of Section 1272 of this title upon payment of court costs, if proof of a valid handgun license and other required identification is shown to the court within ten (10) days of the arrest of the person. The court shall report a dismissal of a charge to the Bureau for consideration of administrative proceedings against the licensee."

    Bold added for emphasis
    -U.S. Army Veteran (2002-2005) 11BVB4 (Infantry, Airborne, Ranger, some other stuff) SGT (E-5)
    -Public Service Professional - I've done it all: LEO, FF, and EMT
    -Certified NRA Instructor
    -CPL / CCW (whatever other acronym you can think of for carrying a concealed pistol) Instructor
    -Co-founder of OKOCA

    I am not an attorney. None of my statements should be accepted, nor are they intended to be offered, as legal advice or fact of law.

  7. #7
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,343
    Quote Originally Posted by Springfield Smitty View Post
    This answers the second two-thirds of your question:

    Section 1290.8.B "The person shall be required to have possession of his or her valid handgun license and a valid Oklahoma driver license or an Oklahoma State photo identification at all times when in possession of an authorized pistol. The person shall display the handgun license on demand of a law enforcement officer; provided, however, that in the absence of reasonable and articulable suspicion of other criminal activity, an individual carrying an unconcealed handgun shall not be disarmed or physically restrained unless the individual fails to display a valid handgun license in response to that demand. Any violation of the provisions of this subsection may be punishable as a criminal offense as authorized by Section 1272 of this title or pursuant to any other applicable provision of law. In addition to any criminal prosecution which may result from not carrying the handgun license and the required identification with the authorized pistol as required by the provisions of this subsection, the person may be subject to an administrative fine for violation of the provisions of this subsection. The administrative fine shall be Fifty Dollars ($50.00) and shall be assessed by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation after a hearing and determination that the licensee is in violation of the provisions of this subsection. Any second or subsequent violation of the provisions of this subsection shall be grounds for the Bureau to suspend the handgun license for a period of six (6) months, in addition to any other penalty imposed.

    Upon the arrest of any person for a violation of the provisions of this subsection, the person may show proof to the court that a valid handgun license and the other required identification has been issued to such person and the person may state any reason why the handgun license or the other required identification was not carried by the person as required by the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act. The court shall dismiss an alleged violation of Section 1272 of this title upon payment of court costs, if proof of a valid handgun license and other required identification is shown to the court within ten (10) days of the arrest of the person. The court shall report a dismissal of a charge to the Bureau for consideration of administrative proceedings against the licensee."

    Bold added for emphasis
    That is an interesting piece of law...it does not discribe under what circumstances a officer may demand ID, only that if he does, and if you produce your ID, he cannot disarm you...is there somewhere else in OK law that better discribes under what circumstances an officer may Demand ID?

    Looks like this will have a good chance to be abused until the courts stop it. So, I would be prepared to present my ID, and the complain..and depending on how the complaint was handled, possibly sue for a 4th ammendment violation.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Springfield Smitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    OKC, OK (Heading back to MI very soon - thank goodness)
    Posts
    296
    Hermannr,

    There is nothing that qualifies under what circumstances the ID and permit may be demanded. Your point is exactly what we are disputing at this point. Your response is also something that we are strongly considering. We (OKOCA) hope to develop a dialogue with sheriffs and police chiefs to discuss the possible fourth amendment issues and encourage them to consider such issues. It is our goal to convince them via a simple and intelligent conversation that they need to use discretion in hopes that we can avoid litigation. However, if this plea is ignored or blatantly disregarded, I for one will not be afraid to move forward with such action. I feel that SCOTUS has been very clear on the stop and ID subject and a civil rights lawsuit would be easily won.
    Last edited by Springfield Smitty; 06-09-2012 at 08:08 PM. Reason: Grammar
    -U.S. Army Veteran (2002-2005) 11BVB4 (Infantry, Airborne, Ranger, some other stuff) SGT (E-5)
    -Public Service Professional - I've done it all: LEO, FF, and EMT
    -Certified NRA Instructor
    -CPL / CCW (whatever other acronym you can think of for carrying a concealed pistol) Instructor
    -Co-founder of OKOCA

    I am not an attorney. None of my statements should be accepted, nor are they intended to be offered, as legal advice or fact of law.

  9. #9
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,343
    Quote Originally Posted by Springfield Smitty View Post
    Hermannr,

    There is nothing that qualifies under what circumstances the ID and permit may be demanded. Your point is exactly what we are disputing at this point. Your response is also something that we are strongly considering. We (OKOCA) hope to develop a dialogue with sheriffs and police chiefs to discuss the possible fourth amendment issues and encourage them to consider such issues. It is our goal to convince them via a simple and intelligent conversation that they need to use discretion in hopes that we can avoid litigation. However, if this plea is ignored or blatantly disregarded, I will not afraid to move forward with such action. I feel that SCOTUS has been very clear on the stop and ID subject and a civil rights lawsuit would be easily won.
    Well, I know it can be done. I used to live in Skagit Co, WA. The Sheriff there is a rabid elitist anti-gunner...as far as he is concerned only LE and "proper" (politically connected) people should even be allowed to own guns, let alone carry...but he also knows the reality of WA state law. His dad was a Lawyer and a Judge in Skagit Co for many years (actually he was my lawyer 30 years ago) and his dad did teach him one thing..."don't buck the system, it will burn your political carrer". Very few? (none that I know of) insidences of OC/LE problems in Skagit Co for OC. I used to OC there myself when I lived (and carried) there from 1970-2005) My first (unlicensed) OC was in July 1970, in Sedro-Woolley, Skagit Co. at the Loggerrodeo.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,311
    The provision for disarming will be ignored, and the courts won't do anything about it.

    Texas law requires that a peace officer reasonably fear for the safety of himself, the licensee, or a third party in order to disarm a licensee. Many do so anyway, and just state that it's SOP to run the numbers. Other than entering a secure law enforcement facility, that is the only statutory authority to disarm a licensee, and the lack of authority has been ignored since 1996.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Springfield Smitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    OKC, OK (Heading back to MI very soon - thank goodness)
    Posts
    296
    Scene safety is a VERY poor excuse for disarming a licensee. This should not be tolerated anywhere by anyone and has been successfully litigated several times over in many states throughout the country. I strongly suggest that anyone experiencing this unconstitutional behavior retain an attorney and get what they are owed.
    -U.S. Army Veteran (2002-2005) 11BVB4 (Infantry, Airborne, Ranger, some other stuff) SGT (E-5)
    -Public Service Professional - I've done it all: LEO, FF, and EMT
    -Certified NRA Instructor
    -CPL / CCW (whatever other acronym you can think of for carrying a concealed pistol) Instructor
    -Co-founder of OKOCA

    I am not an attorney. None of my statements should be accepted, nor are they intended to be offered, as legal advice or fact of law.

  12. #12
    Regular Member MarlboroLts5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Kingsland, Georgia, United States
    Posts
    403

    Imagine this 911 call......

    911: 911, what is your emergency?
    Caller: Yes, I'd like to report a suspicious person.
    911: Ok, what is the problem, sir?
    Caller: There is a man....he's just standing by his car.....and he seems to be pointing something at the passing cars.... plus, he appears to have a gun in a holster on his hip.
    911: a gun, sir?
    Caller: Yes Ma'am.
    911: Can you describe the man and the car, sir?
    Caller: Yes Ma'am....he is wearing a blue short sleeved shirt, with black pockets, and black slacks. He also has several other items hanging from his belt. And, there is something shiny above his left shirt pocket, but I can't make out what it is.....
    911: Ok, sir. Can you describe the car?
    Caller: Yes....it is a white, 4-door sedan. It has a big what looks like a grill guard on the front. It also has flashing red and blue lights on the roof. And on the door it says Police.
    911: Sir, that is a Police Officer, most likely he is pointing a radar gun at the cars to check if they are speeding. Is this a joke, sir?
    Caller: No Ma'am....our Police Chief said ANYONE with a gun in a holster on their hip should be treated as a suspicious person, and I'd really like the police to check him out......like I said Ma'am, he looks really suspicious.
    911: (silence)
    Caller: Hello???.........








    Hey....it could happen....LMAO
    Last edited by MarlboroLts5150; 06-10-2012 at 09:14 PM. Reason: spelling.
    "My dedication to my country's flag rests on my ardent belief in this noblest of causes, equality for all. If my future rests under this earth rather than upon it, I fear not."

    -Leopold Karpeles, US Civil War Medal of Honor Recipient

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by MarlboroLts5150 View Post
    911: 911, what is your emergency?
    Caller: Yes, I'd like to report a suspicious person.
    911: Ok, what is the problem, sir?
    Caller: There is a man....he's just standing by his car.....and he seems to be pointing something at the passing cars.... plus, he appears to have a gun in a holster on his hip.
    911: a gun, sir?
    Caller: Yes Ma'am.
    911: Can you describe the man and the car, sir?
    Caller: Yes Ma'am....he is wearing a blue short sleeved shirt, with black pockets, and black slacks. He also has several other items hanging from his belt. And, there is something shiny above his left shirt pocket, but I can't make out what it is.....
    911: Ok, sir. Can you describe the car?
    Caller: Yes....it is a white, 4-door sedan. It has a big what looks like a grill guard on the front. It also has flashing red and blue lights on the roof. And on the door it says Police.
    911: Sir, that is a Police Officer, most likely he is pointing a radar gun at the cars to check if they are speeding. Is this a joke, sir?
    Caller: No Ma'am....our Police Chief said ANYONE with a gun in a holster on their hip should be treated as a suspicious person, and I'd really like the police to check him out......like I said Ma'am, he looks really suspicious.
    911: (silence)
    Caller: Hello???.........








    Hey....it could happen....LMAO
    omg that would be pretty good. In fact if I was drunk and saw a cop I would seriously consider placing a call like that.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    581
    Quote Originally Posted by MarlboroLts5150 View Post
    911: 911, what is your emergency?
    Caller: Yes, I'd like to report a suspicious person.
    911: Ok, what is the problem, sir?
    Caller: There is a man....he's just standing by his car.....and he seems to be pointing something at the passing cars.... plus, he appears to have a gun in a holster on his hip.
    911: a gun, sir?
    Caller: Yes Ma'am.
    911: Can you describe the man and the car, sir?
    Caller: Yes Ma'am....he is wearing a blue short sleeved shirt, with black pockets, and black slacks. He also has several other items hanging from his belt. And, there is something shiny above his left shirt pocket, but I can't make out what it is.....
    911: Ok, sir. Can you describe the car?
    Caller: Yes....it is a white, 4-door sedan. It has a big what looks like a grill guard on the front. It also has flashing red and blue lights on the roof. And on the door it says Police.
    911: Sir, that is a Police Officer, most likely he is pointing a radar gun at the cars to check if they are speeding. Is this a joke, sir?
    Caller: No Ma'am....our Police Chief said ANYONE with a gun in a holster on their hip should be treated as a suspicious person, and I'd really like the police to check him out......like I said Ma'am, he looks really suspicious.
    911: (silence)
    Caller: Hello???.........








    Hey....it could happen....LMAO
    Now that's some funny commentary, yes sir! Now followed by police chiefs name and date articol/ quote made by him would also be a nice addition to the 911 recording tape.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    2,918
    Quote Originally Posted by MarlboroLts5150 View Post
    911: 911, what is your emergency?
    Caller: Yes, I'd like to report a suspicious person.
    911: Ok, what is the problem, sir?
    Caller: There is a man....he's just standing by his car.....and he seems to be pointing something at the passing cars.... plus, he appears to have a gun in a holster.
    Not entirely farfetched... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlUXUHgYn0g
    (and yes, I took great liberties with the intent of your post. :shame: )
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 06-14-2012 at 10:39 AM.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    4,892
    I'm sure you won't appreciate a now-foreigner's interjection, but if you have to stop and produce your license, you have, in fact, been detained/seized... I'm interested to see how writing down a violation of the 4th amendment is going to be treated differently than when cops simply abuse it for fun... You think there's still a courtroom in your country that will see this for what it is? "We can violate the constitution all we want as long as we write it down first."
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    The Forest is dead because the Trees are Dead.

    "To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine

    It's not that cops are crap, it's that crap is hand-picked for the job by much larger turds. I'd like to meet an exception.

    gunthreadadapters.com

  17. #17
    Regular Member mlr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by ixtow View Post
    I'm sure you won't appreciate a now-foreigner's interjection, but if you have to stop and produce your license, you have, in fact, been detained/seized... I'm interested to see how writing down a violation of the 4th amendment is going to be treated differently than when cops simply abuse it for fun... You think there's still a courtroom in your country that will see this for what it is? "We can violate the constitution all we want as long as we write it down first."
    Which post were you referring to with this quote.
    "We can violate the constitution all we want as long as we write it down first."

    Would help me in following this thread.

    Michael

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Moore, OK
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by mlr View Post
    Which post were you referring to with this quote.
    "We can violate the constitution all we want as long as we write it down first."

    Would help me in following this thread.

    Michael
    I think he is referring to the portion of the law that says law enforcement may demand to see your SDA license just because you are open carry.
    I am not a lawyer and nothing I say should be accepted as legal advice

  19. #19
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,343
    Quote Originally Posted by Springfield Smitty View Post
    Hermannr,

    There is nothing that qualifies under what circumstances the ID and permit may be demanded. Your point is exactly what we are disputing at this point. Your response is also something that we are strongly considering. We (OKOCA) hope to develop a dialogue with sheriffs and police chiefs to discuss the possible fourth amendment issues and encourage them to consider such issues. It is our goal to convince them via a simple and intelligent conversation that they need to use discretion in hopes that we can avoid litigation. However, if this plea is ignored or blatantly disregarded, I for one will not be afraid to move forward with such action. I feel that SCOTUS has been very clear on the stop and ID subject and a civil rights lawsuit would be easily won.
    Well, earlier I stated the position of the Skagit Co Sheriff...someone that is definately an elitist anti...and how the reality of WA state law keeps him in check...

    We were back in Skagit Co last weekend for the Baptism of our 14th grandchild, and while at the Clear Lake boat launch, I as usual was OC'ing and ran into a Skagit Co Deputy...He: "what is it?" Me: "CZ85", deputy: "cool, nice gun". end of discussion. That is the way it should go.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Moore, OK
    Posts
    714

    MWCPD and OCPD Policy

    After hearing some reports that MWC would cite anyone who is OC with disorderly conduct, I decided to call and talk to them about it.

    MWCPD has backed off of the, "we are going to check everyone" stance as Assistant Chief Sid Porter said. They are going to take a more "common sense" approach to it. If they see someone OC in McDonalds as they are eating with their family, they are probably going to go on about their business. If they receive a MWAG call, they will respond to that call but may or may not make contact with the individual. If they make contact, they may or may not ask for a permit. Each case will be handled on its own situation. I was also told the DAs office was meeting this week to determine how to handle this aspect of the law and the officer told me he would let me know if something changed.

    That being said, I did tell him we would like to see the call stopped at the dispatch level and if a unit did respond to a MWAG call, we would prefer the observe only method of response. Who knows if that will make it anywhere or not.

    I have also learned through OACP that OCPD is working on training for their officers and their focus is not to question or detain a person solely for carrying a firearm.
    I am not a lawyer and nothing I say should be accepted as legal advice

  21. #21
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    8,485
    "Working on training"....too funny.

    What part of the law is 'unclear' to LE.

    How about this, free training. "Yo, guys, OC is legal (as of 1 Nov.), don't go and start hassling folks just cuz you don't like seeing a gun on their hip."....."Uh, buy the way, the first knucklehead that does this and gets us sued is gunna regret it.....got it?"

    See, training complete.....I wish.
    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

    Politicians are the tyrants 3000 miles away; thug cops are 3000 tyrants 1 mile away. (Adapted from Benjamin Martin, fictional character extraordinaire)

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Moore, OK
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    "Working on training"....too funny.

    What part of the law is 'unclear' to LE.

    How about this, free training. "Yo, guys, OC is legal (as of 1 Nov.), don't go and start hassling folks just cuz you don't like seeing a gun on their hip."....."Uh, buy the way, the first knucklehead that does this and gets us sued is gunna regret it.....got it?"

    See, training complete.....I wish.
    +1
    I am not a lawyer and nothing I say should be accepted as legal advice

  23. #23
    Regular Member Springfield Smitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    OKC, OK (Heading back to MI very soon - thank goodness)
    Posts
    296
    I'm sorry. I've been trying to bite my tongue, but I can't do it anymore. I'm disappointed in the hypocrisy of OK2A. In this press release they are saying that they will not tolerate ID / SDA license checks without RAS of a crime being committed. Yet, anytime the 4A violations of the law as it is written (which allows them to do so) come up, they say that without that being written into the law it would have never passed. Guess what, you can't have it both ways. Pick a side and stick to it. Either defend your decision or admit that you made a mistake and publicly apologize to all of the gun owners you supposedly represent for assisting in the destruction of their 4A rights.

    I'm sick of them bragging about the way "they" were instrumental in passing this law like nobody else was. Then when people actually read SB1733 and realize that their rights are being trampled on, they turn face and publish this press release. Hypocrisy at it's best...

    I want to point out that while I am on the BOD of OKOCA, this post represents a personal opinion and not necessarily that of OKOCA. However, it does reflect the opinion of many of our members.
    -U.S. Army Veteran (2002-2005) 11BVB4 (Infantry, Airborne, Ranger, some other stuff) SGT (E-5)
    -Public Service Professional - I've done it all: LEO, FF, and EMT
    -Certified NRA Instructor
    -CPL / CCW (whatever other acronym you can think of for carrying a concealed pistol) Instructor
    -Co-founder of OKOCA

    I am not an attorney. None of my statements should be accepted, nor are they intended to be offered, as legal advice or fact of law.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,712
    Quote Originally Posted by Springfield Smitty View Post
    I'm sorry. I've been trying to bite my tongue, but I can't do it anymore. I'm disappointed in the hypocrisy of OK2A. In this press release they are saying that they will not tolerate ID / SDA license checks without RAS of a crime being committed. Yet, anytime the 4A violations of the law as it is written (which allows them to do so) come up, they say that without that being written into the law it would have never passed. Guess what, you can't have it both ways. Pick a side and stick to it. Either defend your decision or admit that you made a mistake and publicly apologize to all of the gun owners you supposedly represent for assisting in the destruction of their 4A rights.

    I'm sick of them bragging about the way "they" were instrumental in passing this law like nobody else was. Then when people actually read SB1733 and realize that their rights are being trampled on, they turn face and publish this press release. Hypocrisy at it's best...

    I want to point out that while I am on the BOD of OKOCA, this post represents a personal opinion and not necessarily that of OKOCA. However, it does reflect the opinion of many of our members.
    You fail to realize that it can be both ways. The law states that if asked you must supply it. The 4A violation is when they ask when there's now RAS/PC. So due to this law if they ask during a traffic stop or some other detainment then I have to give it up. But if they try to just hassle me and ask for it for no reason then the OK2A doesn't support that.

    And without that bit in there, regardless of how much people (such as the OK2A) might not like it, chances are high the law wouldn't of passed. I mean just look at all the BS it took to even get an OC law to the floor. Also one thing I have noticed in my short life is that all of these issues that we have (not just gun issues, but ALL issues), we usually got there via babysteps. Likewise rarely are things fixed with massive steps, but rather it is usually babysteps over time that get us out of the issue short of full up revolt. We got a law that wasn't perfect (I talked with many in OK2A that would have prefered a no-permit law), but we took what we felt we could get in the current political climate and will continue to push for more.

  25. #25
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    8,485
    Things are 'broken' via massive steps, getting the broken fixed takes baby steps.....funny how that works out.
    I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

    Politicians are the tyrants 3000 miles away; thug cops are 3000 tyrants 1 mile away. (Adapted from Benjamin Martin, fictional character extraordinaire)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •