• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

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

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
"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.
 

hrdware

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
740
Location
Moore, OK
"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
 

Springfield Smitty

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
296
Location
OKC, OK (Heading back to MI very soon - thank good
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.
 

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
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.
 

docachna

Newbie
Joined
Sep 28, 2012
Messages
58
Location
suburban Nashville TN
Ciity of Norman not apparently a friend of OC

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.[/

Norman PD must not be on the training bandwagon yet. They apparently intend to protect the public by stopping each and every OC'er to insure that they are licensed to carry that handgun.

I guess that means they are going to protect the public by stopping each and every motor vehicle, to insure that the driver is licensed to drive that vehicle.

I see no difference. Both are lawful acts, when the actor is licensed to do so.You are allowed to perform these acts in peace, with out fear from governmental intrusion. LEO may NOT stop a person who is performing a lawful act unless he as a reasonable, articulable suspicion that the actor has committed - is committing - or is about to commt a criminal offense.

BUT - look what Lt. Jim Keesee of Norman PD says about it: (Norman Transcript Aug. 12):


NORMAN — City legal staff and Norman police officers have been meeting as a committee to discuss how to handle the open carry law that will go into effect Nov. 1.

The Open Carry Committee is looking to hold public forums for anyone who may have questions about the new law. Lt. Jim Keesee with the Norman Police Department said no forum has officially been set yet, but they hope to have one before November.

The committee discusses how businesses, individuals and officers will be affected by the new law. For example, businesses that have signs stating “no weapons allowed” can make contact with the person carrying a weapon or contact to the police to jointly tell the person to leave.

If the person carrying a weapon refuses to leave the business, police can issue a trespassing citation. The business also can refuse service to the individual for not abiding by their business practices.

The committee also will review the best practices other states have utilized in dealing with the law.

The law is basically the same as the concealed weapons law, except the concealed part was taken out, Keesee said. Still, all police officers will be trained on the new law.

Officers are allowed to make contact with those who choose to carry their weapons without concealment and ask for their concealed carry permit. However, many who carry weapons in the Norman community may not plan on doing open carry, he said.

“They don’t want to excite any individuals or business owners,” Keesee said.
First post. Lived in OK 13 years; licensed in OH 5; just moved to TN. 3 states that all handle Concealed and Open Carry differenly (OH had constitutional carry - anyone not prohibited from possessing a firearm could openly carry, obviously not in prohibited areas).

Lt. Keesee's statement seems to plainly indicate that some, but not all, Norman residents or visitors are entitled to walk down the street free from government harassment contrary to the Constitution. Those exercising their First Amendment right to free speech will remain unaccosted, presumably, as long as their activities do not infringe on the rights of others. However, let an Open Carrier walk down the street - call goes to NPD - cars come - what next ? Carrier proned on the sidewalk ? Gun taken and "made safe" ? Confiscated "? Kept ? Carrier handcuffed while "investigation" ensues?

WHAT INVESTIGATION ? Unless someone reported him taking an action OTHER THAN carrying the gun, HE HAS COMMITTED NO OFFENSE ! They also have no reasonable suspicion that he is about to.

I had an interesting conversation with an Ohio cop once. He informed me in no uncertain terms that every time he saw me OC'ing, he was going to stop and ID me, and check warrants, even though he knew me personally. When I asked him why, he said "Mrs. Smith down the street gets hyper when you walk by with a Glock on your hip." I said, "OK, Tom, from now on, every time that black kid around the corner comes by my house around dusk, I'm going to call you to come and check him out. He makes me hyper." "Well, but he's not doing anything wrong - he's just walking". "That's right - and I'm just carrying. We're both doing what we're entitled to do. Unless one of us escalates it past that, you gotta LEAVE US BOTH ALONE."

Norman PD needs a thoughtful memorandum from the City Attorney reciting the law as to invstigatory stops, particularly as they pertain to open carriers of weapons. Taking actions as a law enforcement officer isn't something you just do "off the cuff" - you'd better know the result BEFORE you take the act.

Norman would do well to research training memos recently put out by the Akron P.D. and Cincinnati P.D. regarding the exact same issue. Both of them were explicit - open carry of a firemarm, ABSENT OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES, is not only not an offense, it is not even cause to stop and interview.

Dispatchers need to be more attuned to the possible overreaction of a "MWAG" caller.
"What is he doing ?
" He's carrying a gun down the street."
"Is it a handgun or a long gun ?"
"It's a pistol."
"Where is the gun ?"
"It's in his holster, on his belt."
"Has he taken it out of the holster?"
"No."
"Has he pointed it at anyone ?"
"No"
"Is he behaving in an unusual or threatening manner, or acting as if he is going to hurt someone ?"
"No, he just has a GUN. Can you come out here and do something ?"
"Well, ma'am, it doesn't appear he is breaking any laws. If we have an officer free we may have him drive by and form an opinion on his behavior, but you have to understand, just merely openly carrying a handgun in public is no longer a crime in Oklahoma. There has to be something more before we can take action."


Ohio has a very interesting state statute that could provide some relief in such situations:
2921.45 Interfering with civil rights.
(A) No public servant, under color of his office, employment, or authority, shall knowingly deprive, or conspire or attempt to deprive any person of a constitutional or statutory right.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of interfering with civil rights, a misdemeanor of the first degree.


It is not difficult for me to envision that any LEO who attempted to deprive a legal concealed carrier from his constitutional AND statutory right to carry a firearm, could face scrutiny under this provision. I wonder also if Oklahoma has an equivalent statute.

Norman PD will most certainly abrogate the liberties of OC'ers in Norman if they are permitted to. I hope local activists meet with the department officials and point out that, by and large, we're the good guys -we're not the ones you need to be worrrying about !!!!
 

docachna

Newbie
Joined
Sep 28, 2012
Messages
58
Location
suburban Nashville TN
Norman PD permit checks

Just checking in to see if anyone ever contacted Norman PD, and what their response was.

After my post, I wondered if there might be a provision in the new law that allows any Open Carrier to be stopped to check on his permit status (I believe there is a similar provision in Texas that allows any motorist to be stopped for no other reason than to make sure they have an Operator's License - however, IMBM.) If the new law provides this, then these "investigatory stops" may stand up. However, if all an OC'er is doing is walking down Main Street minding his own business, I fail to see how Norman PD or any other LEO can justify under the law stopping him "to demand his papers".

I'm curious to find out if Norman PD has said anything.

EDIT: just noticed this excellent exposition of the law for the OK City Attorneys group, mentioned in another post on this board:


http://okoca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Open-Carry-Paper-2012.pdf

If the Norman City Attorney's Office has this material (which should be ascertainable by an Open Records request), they are on fair notice of the potential constitutional problems with stops of OC'ers with no RAS other than the fact that the OC'er is open carrying. Nothing is ever for sure, but faced with this advice, I think it would be very unwise for Norman's City Attorney to either ignore the subject, or even worse, advise their officers that stops are warranted for no other reason than OC'ing.
 
Last edited:
Top