Help please with you OK OC problem

OK guys...I obviously am not getting anywhere discussing this with you guys. I don't know where you misunderstandings come form, but I want to go to the horses mouth.

Could you please post the email address of your BEST OC supporter in your State legislature and senate?

Two email addresses are enough. One of each.

There are two things I wish to ask them.

Question #1: Do they think that changing the wording 21-1272 to match the wording in 21-1290.4 by adding the word "concealed" to 21-1272... do they think that would fix the whole OC question> do they think that one word "correction" would make it. Bill verbage something like, to add the word "concealed to 21-2172 so as to make 21-1272 and 21-1290.4 read the same. Present condition, 21-1290.4 quotes 21-1272 but has an added the word concealed. This bill would correct this by also adding the work concealed to 21-1272 (Concealed is already implied) This would also correct a possible constitutional problem with 1272

Question #2: Does or does not 21-1290.22(a) allow for a persons right to carry as the property owner pleases on his own property, or as an invited guest on another's personal property, (as in OK state constitution Artical 2 Section 24)? That is: a person may Carry a firearm, loaded or unloaded, open or conceal, as they please, on their own private property as stated in 21-1290.22(A)

hermannr said:

OK guys...I obviously am not getting anywhere discussing this with you guys. I don't know where you misunderstandings come form, but I want to go to the horses mouth.

Could you please post the email address of your BEST OC supporter in your State legislature and senate?

Two email addresses are enough. One of each.

There are two things I wish to ask them.

Question #1: Do they think that changing the wording 21-1272 to match the wording in 21-1290.4 by adding the word "concealed" to 21-1272... do they think that would fix the whole OC question> do they think that one word "correction" would make it. Bill verbage something like, to add the word "concealed to 21-2172 so as to make 21-1272 and 21-1290.4 read the same. Present condition, 21-1290.4 quotes 21-1272 but has an added the word concealed. This bill would correct this by also adding the work concealed to 21-1272 (Concealed is already implied) This would also correct a possible constitutional problem with 1272

Question #2: Does or does not 21-1290.22(a) allow for a persons right to carry as the property owner pleases on his own property, or as an invited guest on another's personal property, (as in OK state constitution Artical 2 Section 24)? That is: a person may Carry a firearm, loaded or unloaded, open or conceal, as they please, on their own private property as stated in 21-1290.22(A)

Click to expand...

I can give you a few for the House:

Randy Terrill - randyterrill@okhouse.gov
Paul Wesselhoft - paulwesselhoft@okhouse.gov

Not sure about anyone in the Senate any longer.

Having a hard time understanding your Question #1, but with Question #2, yes I can convey any rights I have to anyone visiting my property. However I do not have the right (in an incorporated area) to openly carry on my property, outside my house (unless protecting life or property) and therefore can not convey that to anyone visiting my property.

I don't understand why you think we have misunderstandings because these are the issues we have been dealing with for a few years now. Trying to untangle the knots that are our firearms laws.

Thanks hrdware:

Question #1 is basically an end-around play on words to allow OC. Actually when I first read 1272 (because I had already read the OK constitution, and knowing the history behind ID OC, that is the court case "in re Brinckly) I thought that what it ment was how 1290.4 actually read.

You add that one word (concealed) to 1272 and IMHO you automatically have unregulated OC everywhere in the state.

1272 says "carry on or about your person". 1290.4 says "carry concealed on or about your person" Funny (is in strange) 1290.4 states it in a way that could easily make you think the word "concealed" is already in 1272. (I would say it is assumed, or at least should be assumed pursuent to Article 2 section 24 of the Oklahoma state constitution.)

As to what you said about question #2:

I do not understand where you get the idea that in an incorporated area you cannot OC on your own property, in town or out of town? That makes no sense...can you please tell me where in teh law the legislature has authorized the incorporated areas to do that? I do not think that is possible for two reason. The OK constitution gives the power to regulate to the legislature, and on top of that, the legislature has a good preemption statute.

I do not see where the legislature has given that power to the local governments (I wouldn't think they could anyway). Discharge of a firearm, ok, posess a firearm or any other firearm related thing, outside your dwelling...no way. If nothing else state premption takes care of that. Part (B) of 21-1289.24 specifically states that a local government cannot do that. I would also bet that if they charged you, with that new law that just passed, you could force the charging governmental entity to automatically anti up a bit of pocket change (that is how it works here in WA too)

Read this, especially part "B":

21-1289.24.

FIREARM REGULATION - STATE PREEMPTION

A. The State Legislature hereby occupies and preempts the entire field
of legislation in this state touching in any way firearms, components,
ammunition, and supplies to the complete exclusion of any order,
ordinance, or regulation by any municipality or other political
subdivision of this state. Any existing or future orders, ordinances,
or regulations in this field, except as provided for in subsection C
of this section, are null and void. Provided, however, a municipality
may adopt any ordinance relating to the discharge of firearms within
the jurisdiction of the municipality.

B. No municipality or other political subdivision of this state shall
adopt any order, ordinance, or regulation concerning in any way the
sale, purchase, purchase delay, transfer, ownership, use, keeping,
possession, carrying, bearing, transportation, licensing, permit,
registration, taxation other than sales and compensating use taxes, or
other controls on firearms, components, ammunition, and supplies.

Now, please tell me where a local government can regulate your carry on your own property...regulating what you do on your own property (except discharge of a firearm) cannot be LEGALLY done by a local entity.

Forgive any bad grammar as im on my wifes tablet.

The issue with carrying on your property comes from not being able to meet any of the exemptions to the unlawful carry law. The easiest one to meet is recreational use, but unless you have a legal firing range on your property you cant meet the requirements due to cities having local discharge ordaninces. And in the preemption you quoted they can regulate discharge. And without legal discharge you cant recreationally shoot.

Aknazer said:

Forgive any bad grammar as im on my wifes tablet.

The issue with carrying on your property comes from not being able to meet any of the exemptions to the unlawful carry law. The easiest one to meet is recreational use, but unless you have a legal firing range on your property you cant meet the requirements due to cities having local discharge ordaninces. And in the preemption you quoted they can regulate discharge. And without legal discharge you cant recreationally shoot.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know most states (including ours) allow the local government to regulate discharge, but not for self defence. Self defence and lawfull police activity are allowed to discharge..local government has no power over those two.

However, we are not talking about discharge, we are talking about carry for self protection.

You have to remember, that whch is not specifically prohibited, is allowed. Common law. So you quote 1272...no doesn't work, because that only applies to public places, not your private property.

So, I give you two reasons you do NOT need an exemption. Reason one: Article 2 Section 26 of the Oklahoma State Constitution...what part of "...Shall not be prohibited..." does not apply? This is your exemption.

Second item: Title 21-1290.22 is written in such a way as to say, we recognize that on private property there is no need for an exemption, we are here reitterating that the constitution applies to your private property and business.

I know, If I still lived in OK I would OC on my own property, and if charged with some violation, I would NOT plea bargin the opportunity away. Also, when all was said and done, I would go after the governmental entity for my costs, and get them.