Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Public Forums regarding OC coming to Norman. We need to attend.

  1. #1
    Regular Member okiebryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Director, Oklahoma Open Carry Association
    Posts
    449

    Public Forums regarding OC coming to Norman. We need to attend.

    http://normantranscript.com/x5854652...open-carry-law

    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.

    Thanks to forum member "docachna" for catching this article.

  2. #2
    Regular Member okiebryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Director, Oklahoma Open Carry Association
    Posts
    449
    I called and left a vm for Lt. Keesee (pronounced Kuh-see). I'll let everyone know what I learn when (if) he calls.

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    My experience is that these things are sometimes used by police to propagandize attendees into believing the police have more power than they really do. Meaning, police carefully skirt 4th Amendment issues such as reasonable suspicion and just pretend they can come up to anybody and start asking questions and you're supposed to cooperate.

    I've personally seen a cop during a townhall type meeting do a demonstration role-play where he pointedly ignored three times the citizen's refused consent to encounter where no RAS existed.

    Attendees to these things should get well-versed on the case law regarding reasonable suspicion, consent, right to silence, and any identity statutes or ordinances. These are the areas where cops tend to count on citizen ignorance.

    You really need to be able to call-out any false premises or sneakiness by the cops in front of the other attendees so the other attendees don't come away with a false impression given them by police.


    Of course, if you do, then the police will also know you know the law. Its a sad commentary, but back shortly after the Tony's incident in Manassas, VA, the grapevine reported local police were told by their commanders to leave the OCers alone because the OCers knew the law better than the cops did. Now, this was in reference to firearms carry law; but it will definitely not hurt if you create the impression in the police that you know 4A case law on RAS, consent, right to silence, and stop-and-identify statutes or ordinances so well that you're dangerous to their careers and pocketbooks to mess with.
    Last edited by Citizen; 09-30-2012 at 04:32 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Moore, OK
    Posts
    744
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    My experience is that these things are sometimes used by police to propagandize attendees into believing the police have more power than they really do. Meaning, police carefully skirt 4th Amendment issues such as reasonable suspicion and just pretend they can come up to anybody and start asking questions and you're supposed to cooperate.

    I've personally seen a cop during a townhall type meeting do a demonstration role-play where he pointedly ignored three times the citizen's refused consent to encounter where no RAS existed.

    Attendees to these things should get well-versed on the case law regarding reasonable suspicion, consent, right to silence, and any identity statutes or ordinances. These are the areas where cops tend to count on citizen ignorance.

    You really need to be able to call-out any false premises or sneakiness by the cops in front of the other attendees so the other attendees don't come away with a false impression given them by police.


    Of course, if you do, then the police will also know you know the law. Its a sad commentary, but back shortly after the Tony's incident in Manassas, VA, the grapevine reported local police were told by their commanders to leave the OCers alone because the OCers knew the law better than the cops did. Now, this was in reference to firearms carry law; but it will definitely not hurt if you create the impression in the police that you know 4A case law on RAS, consent, right to silence, and stop-and-identify statutes or ordinances so well that you're dangerous to their careers and pocketbooks to mess with.
    The problem is that current Oklahoma law will allow LEO to ask for your permit without any RAS of a crime. Although that is a 4A violation, until it is challenged in court, current law allows for it.
    I am not a lawyer and nothing I say should be accepted as legal advice

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by hrdware View Post
    The problem is that current Oklahoma law will allow LEO to ask for your permit without any RAS of a crime. Although that is a 4A violation, until it is challenged in court, current law allows for it.
    Got it. Thanks for bringing me up to date.

    So, fill in the rest of the picture as far as learning goes. So, the cop can ask for the permit?

    Unless the statute makes express provision for temporary seizure for officer safety, I would argue strenuously against such seizure. SCOTUS case law allows search and temporary seizure of a weapon only with RAS during a foot encounter as far as I know. Terry v Ohio. Car stops are different. See PA v Mimms; in Mimms the court equated guns with dangerousness and permit seizure of the gun just because there is one present.

    I would also be completely ready for any stretching of consent and badgering, or labels of being uncooperative for exercising 5A right to silence.

    What is the recording law in OK? How about the federal circuit that covers OK?

    You get my point. Look it over from a hundred angles and be ready to show greater knowledge than the cops at the townhall meeting.

    I don't expect you to do this next, but I would. I would laugh in their faces if they gave me any idea they were going to check permits just for the sake of checking a permit without other RAS. It may be legal, but I would show them to be anti-rights thugs who just want to harass OCers if they plan on stopping OCers just to check the permit. Bwhahahahahahahaha! Big tough cops got nothing better to do than harass law-abiding citizens on the off-chance of catching one without a permit! Bwahahahahahahaha!! That sort of thing. If they didn't give me the idea, I would ask. And, then I would make it clear that I would be recording any encounter and every single mistake made by the cop would become the subject of a formal written complaint for internal affairs. Remember, this is new ground for cops and they're not terribly likely to have run into the organized determination other PD's have.

    Of course, another OCer can play the good cop routine while I play the bad, threatening cop. Another OCer can say he wants to be friends and make things go smooth and so forth.

    Oh, and be ready for the great police lie. "We don't want these to be adversarial encounters." HA! He's lying. He absolutely wants it to be an adversarial encounter. He's going to be investigating you for the crime of OCing without a permit. That is definitely an adversarial encounter. What he wants if for you to not be adversarial while he is being adversarial.
    Last edited by Citizen; 09-30-2012 at 08:25 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Moore, OK
    Posts
    744
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Got it. Thanks for bringing me up to date.

    So, fill in the rest of the picture as far as learning goes. So, the cop can ask for the permit?

    Unless the statute makes express provision for temporary seizure for officer safety, I would argue strenuously against such seizure. SCOTUS case law allows search and temporary seizure of a weapon only with RAS during a foot encounter as far as I know. Terry v Ohio. Car stops are different. See PA v Mimms; in Mimms the court equated guns with dangerousness and permit seizure of the gun just because there is one present.

    I would also be completely ready for any stretching of consent and badgering, or labels of being uncooperative for exercising 5A right to silence.

    What is the recording law in OK? How about the federal circuit that covers OK?

    You get my point. Look it over from a hundred angles and be ready to show greater knowledge than the cops at the townhall meeting.

    I don't expect you to do this next, but I would. I would laugh in their faces if they gave me any idea they were going to check permits just for the sake of checking a permit without other RAS. It may be legal, but I would show them to be anti-rights thugs who just want to harass OCers if they plan on stopping OCers just to check the permit. Bwhahahahahahahaha! Big tough cops got nothing better to do than harass law-abiding citizens on the off-chance of catching one without a permit! Bwahahahahahahaha!! That sort of thing. If they didn't give me the idea, I would ask. And, then I would make it clear that I would be recording any encounter and every single mistake made by the cop would become the subject of a formal written complaint for internal affairs. Remember, this is new ground for cops and they're not terribly likely to have run into the organized determination other PD's have.

    Of course, another OCer can play the good cop routine while I play the bad, threatening cop. Another OCer can say he wants to be friends and make things go smooth and so forth.

    Oh, and be ready for the great police lie. "We don't want these to be adversarial encounters." HA! He's lying. He absolutely wants it to be an adversarial encounter. He's going to be investigating you for the crime of OCing without a permit. That is definitely an adversarial encounter. What he wants if for you to not be adversarial while he is being adversarial.
    The statute actually expressly prohibits the seizure of the firearm or detainment of the open carrier after the permit has been presented.

    Quote Originally Posted by "Title 21 Section 1290.8 Paragraph B
    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.
    I am not a lawyer and nothing I say should be accepted as legal advice

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by hrdware View Post
    The statute actually expressly prohibits the seizure of the firearm or detainment of the open carrier after the permit has been presented.
    You know what. You've convinced me. There is nothing else to learn or do in preparation. Y'all got it covered. The only thing left is to just attend.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  8. #8
    Regular Member okiebryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Director, Oklahoma Open Carry Association
    Posts
    449
    We are also fortunate in that Oklahoma is a one-party state when it comes to recording conversations.

    Okla. Stat. tit. 13, 176.4: Anyone who is a party to a wire, oral or electronic communication or who has obtained consent from a party can lawfully record or disclose the contents of that communication, so long as he does not do so in furtherance of a criminal act.

    Under the statute, consent is not required for the taping of a non-electronic communication uttered by a person who does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in that communication. Okla Stat. tit. 13, 176.2.

  9. #9
    Regular Member okiebryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Director, Oklahoma Open Carry Association
    Posts
    449
    Citizen, I'm working on a sticky that covers all the finer points of our new law. It's a bit longer than I wanted it to be, but I should have it posted shortly for everyone to pick apart, cuss and discuss.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    suburban Nashville TN
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by hrdware View Post
    The problem is that current Oklahoma law will allow LEO to ask for your permit without any RAS of a crime. Although that is a 4A violation, until it is challenged in court, current law allows for it.
    Are you still convinced of that, in light of the presentation by the City Attorney to his assocation (I think he was from Warr Acres) ?? He seems to have very, very strong reservations about whether a stop SOLELY based on OC'ing is constitutional.

    After reading his paper, I would also seriously consider asking Norman, and any other similar municipality, for any internal memoranda dealing with the subject, particularly covering advice they've given to their PD on the subject. If they don't have it or won't turn it over, make them tell you what advice they've given the PD. How are the citizens supposed to know what conduct is proscribed until we know what standards the gov't is using ??? In this case, it's not at all clear, and I don't think it's overreaching to ask them "what's your position" ???

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Owasso, OK
    Posts
    30
    The city attorney made it very clear that he would tread very lightly around the issue of asking for permits without probable cause. Just going to have to wait on a test case.

  12. #12
    Regular Member hermannr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Okanogan Highland
    Posts
    2,332
    Just to let you know what can happen. The city of Anacodes had an open session on weapons with the Anacodes CoP (a moderate Dem) and the Skagit co Sheriff (an elitist..ie, or "only people I approve of, and LE should be able to carry" fortunately for us, he knows the polictical reality of WA law)

    Anyway, a couple members of the WA OCDO forum caught this session was on, and attended. When it became obvious the OCDO members knew RCW 9.41 (our firearms law) better than either the Sheriff and the Anacodes CoP, when the questions came to OC, the answers were defered to the OCDO members.

    Later in the session it was determined by the OCDO memebers this was actually a Democratic party sponsered discussion...their observation was, some wanted to listen to what the law actually stated...and some just up and left. You will probably meet the same responses.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    suburban Nashville TN
    Posts
    58

    Meeting set with Norman City officials and police

    Quote Originally Posted by okiebryan View Post
    http://normantranscript.com/x5854652...open-carry-law

    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.....
    Guess they've been set:


    The police plan a forum at 6:30 p.m. Oct. 29 in City Council Chambers, 201 W. Gray Street. They want the public to know what they can expect from their police department in response to the new legislation.
    http://normantranscript.com/opinion/...carry-in-state

    The tenor of this article is a bit different than the first one quoting Lt. Keesee:

    Law enforcement officials say they can ask a person openly carrying a firearm to see their license but that person does not have to comply. Only if there is another reason to confront the person does the gun owner have to comply and show their license.
    Interesting that no one with NPD is quoted here. I sure hope somebody shows up the 29th and asks NPD if this is their position. Problem is, of course - how does the OC'er know which is the case ? Ask them ??

  14. #14
    Regular Member mlr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    50
    "The police plan a forum at 6:30 p.m. Oct. 29 in City Council Chambers, 201 W. Gray Street. They want the public to know what they can expect from their police department in response to the new legislation."

    They are not allowing much time to correct any errors in their new policy if by chance there are any pointed out at the meeting.

    Michael

Posting Permissions

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