Open Carry: Oklahoma scores partial victory

Cylinder

Philosopher
Cylinder
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
6,062
Location
Arkansas
Sooners score partial victory in open carry debate

Governor Mary Fallin has signed into law Senate Bill 1733, a measure that allows Oklahoma citizens to openly carry firearms.

Governor Mary Fallin signed the legislation on Tuesday, May 15. The bill permits those who are licensed, or already have been licensed, to carry a firearm under the Oklahoma Self Defense Act to openly carry a weapon or conceal it. It also allows property owners to openly carry a firearm on their property without a concealed carry permit for the purpose of self defense.

To receive a license under the Oklahoma Self Defense Act, applicants must take a firearms safety and training course and submit to a background check by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation. Those convicted of felonies and certain misdemeanors may not receive a handgun license.
Click to expand...
 
In the classical meaning of the word, tyrants.

Open carry won't last long though. As soon as the bloodbath begins like it did in the other open carry states, the citizens of Oklahoma will be crawling on hands and knees to the statehouse to beg their babysitters back.
 
Last edited:
I, for one, am glad we can have the polite society of Somalia.

Welcome to Obama's America.
 
AvalonXQ said:
And crime-enablers, AKA gun-control leftists.
Click to expand...

Except when gun control laws were introduced in Australia:

There is contention over the effects of the gun control laws in Australia, with some researchers reporting significant drops in gun-related crime, and others reporting no significant effect in gun related or overall crime rates
Click to expand...

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_control

So no increase but debate whether there is a decrease.

So please demonstrate that tough gun control laws result in higher crime levels
 
I am in full support of Australian open carry. If we have turkeys to worry about, those drop bears must be terrifying!
 
ponderingturtle said:
So kings then. Is there an infestation of kings that need killing in Oklahoma?
Click to expand...
Since the open-carry law was passed there have unequivocally been zero sightings of kings in Oklahoma.

Proof that open-carry works.

For the record, though this joke might indicate otherwise, I am a supporter of open carry and concealed carry laws. As The Don says, there is controversy over whether such laws result in a decrease in crime, but I am aware of no evidence that they result in an increase.
 
Garrette said:
Since the open-carry law was passed there have unequivocally been zero sightings of kings in Oklahoma.

Proof that open-carry works.

For the record, though this joke might indicate otherwise, I am a supporter of open carry and concealed carry laws. As The Don says, there is controversy over whether such laws result in a decrease in crime, but I am aware of no evidence that they result in an increase.
Click to expand...

Crime is a much more complex issue than we can easily determine results of such things.

My connect was more that the tyrant thing is either silly if you use the real classical definition of tyrant, or seems to advocate political violence.
 
Last edited:
ponderingturtle said:
Crime is a much more complex issue than we can easily determine results of such things.
Click to expand...
No doubt, which is a reason to reject the "gun ownership is bad" stance when it is not better supported. Note that I am not saying that is your stance.


ponderingturtle said:
My connect was more that the tyrant thing is either silly if you use the real classical definition of tyrant, or seems to advocate political violence.
Click to expand...
If you go back to the USA founding fathers' intent as traditionally interpreted, it advocates the retention of the potential for political violence. As I do not ascribe to the idea that all political violence is inherently worse than the alternatives, I'm okay with that.
 
Garrette said:
No doubt, which is a reason to reject the "gun ownership is bad" stance when it is not better supported. Note that I am not saying that is your stance.


If you go back to the USA founding fathers' intent as traditionally interpreted, it advocates the retention of the potential for political violence. As I do not ascribe to the idea that all political violence is inherently worse than the alternatives, I'm okay with that.
Click to expand...

So then shouldn't we view the failure of the times square bomber as a threat to the capacity of the average american to use political violence? If we really believed that we would understand that the odd terrorist act we don't agree with is the price we pay for our capacity for political violence.
 
Gun rights advocate here.

Doesn't my open carry tell a potential perp to shoot me first?
 
Cylinder said:
That would be a great question if tyrant actually meant king.
Click to expand...

It does, classically at least. It was the title for the king of Rome. Then Rome decided it did not like kings and formed a republic.

This is why Tyrannosaurus Rex is a dumb name. It means king lizard king
, and that is what happens when you mix latin and greek.
 
Cylinder said:
I guess you could, but the use of explosives is not protected as a right in out constitution.
Click to expand...

Second amendment says arms not guns. People just decided that what it said was stupid and what it mentioned was something else.

See everyone is for some arms being outlawed and some not, it is all where you draw the line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom