| Author | Post |
|---|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 02:32 pm |
|
http://www.tahlequahdailypress.com/local/local_story_297093847.html
Local law enforcement officials oppose proposal to allow open-carry firearms
By BOB GIBBINS
Staff Writer
TAHLEQUAH DAILY PRESS —
Three local law enforcement officials are joining with others to oppose a Midwest City man’s attempt to pass an “open carry” law in Oklahoma.
The Associated Press said Donald Ohse has garnered 1,300 signatures in a campaign to get legislators to pass the law. Ohse has a concealed carry permit, but believes it would be safer to carry his firearm in the open.
“I’d be opposed to something like that,” Police Chief Steve Farmer said. “I think it’d make people more nervous if they saw a gun on someone walking down the street.”
Farmer hasn’t had any personal communication from the Oklahoma Association of Chiefs of Police, but the organization has come out against the proposal.
“I think people might anticipate problems, and it could create some bad situations,” Farmer said.
Cherokee County Sheriff Norman Fisher said Wednesday that he has similar concerns about Ohse’s proposal.
“I don’t have a problem with the concealed carry law,” he said. “I think that’s working fine, but I think we’d be asking for trouble if people were allowed to carry a gun in the open.”
The Oklahoma Sheriff’s Association has also came out in opposition to the measure.
Fisher thinks such a proposal would “open up a can of worms.” He said people are required to pass a firearms course to receive a concealed carry permit, but he thinks continued training would be needed if a person could carry a firearm where it’s visible.
Northeastern State University Police Chief Clint Vernon had previously heard of Ohse’s proposal, and he sees problems with it – particularly in a school setting like NSU.
“If you walk into a school shooting situation and 15 people have guns on, you don’t know which one’s the bad guy,” Vernon said. “We have to sometimes make split-second decisions to save someone’s life or our own lives.”
He can foresee see innocent people getting hurt because they don’t know how to react when law enforcement enters a shooting scene.
Vernon said training is another key issue he thinks could be overlooked in such situations.
“We [officers] train regularly on active shooting,” he said. “There are all kind of dangers that would be involved if everybody has a gun.”
Vernon believes several hours of extended training would be required.
“They would need to know how to react in different situations,” he said. “It’s a scary predicament. You’re talking about some possible life-threatening situations.”
Ohse told reporters claims that such a law could lead to Old West-style shootouts is “fear-mongering.” He insists it would be safer for guns to be carried in the open.
Last edited on Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 02:33 pm by Mike
|
TFred
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 13th, 2008 |
| Location: | Virginia USA |
| Posts: | 2465 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 03:07 pm |
|
Mike wrote: Northeastern State University Police Chief Clint Vernon had previously heard of Ohse’s proposal, and he sees problems with it – particularly in a school setting like NSU.
“If you walk into a school shooting situation and 15 people have guns on, you don’t know which one’s the bad guy,” Vernon said. “We have to sometimes make split-second decisions to save someone’s life or our own lives.”
If you walk into a school shooting situation, and 15 people have guns on, the bad guy(s) are already down!
It's when nobody has guns on that it's hard to figure out which one(s) still standing are the bad guys!
Why is this such a difficult concept?
TFred
|
HardChrome
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 04:11 pm |
|
Even if the bad guys are doing no more than simply wearing their weapons, police are not going to gun them down so why would the good guys be in some sort of danger for the same thing. Sounds like the police need the extra training.
Open carry has worked quite well here in Virginia.
|
SlackwareRobert
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Jun 10th, 2008 |
| Location: | Alabama |
| Posts: | 1035 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 04:34 pm |
|
I wonder how he figures out who the bad guy is when the 15 pull thier concealed
pieces out during the fight.
At least the open carry have empty holsters on to indicate GG.
+1 on the dead guy on ground is BG. Remember the Long Island RR shooter.
There everyone was disarmed and the LEO still figured out who shooter was.
Last edited on Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 04:34 pm by SlackwareRobert
|
FreedomJoyAdventure
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Austin, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 138 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 05:12 pm |
|
I've noticed over and over again that whenever someone says they don't trust me (or someone else) with a gun, it's usually because deep down they don't trust themselves. This is especially true of rabid anti-gunners. Back when I used to bother to discuss gun rights with antis, a number of them eventually confided to me that they didn't think they could trust themselves not to kill anybody if they had guns.
The police chiefs may have an extra motive, however. They may find it hard to justify continually increasing the department's budget if citizens can defend themselves. In other words, they don't want any competition for the right to 'protect' us.
It's a protection racket. The police are a nothing more than a protection racket when they try to deny citizens the right to protect themselves.
|
Theseus
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 05:13 pm |
|
I think we can all agree that it understandibly makes the cops jobs hard, after all they train to shoot people with guns...what would happen if all of a sudden cops started shooting armed citizens because their training taught them to. . .
They are trying to protect themselves from these types of unfortunate accidents happening.
|
CrossFire
Founder's Club Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 29th, 2007 |
| Location: | Irving, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 287 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 05:24 pm |
|
Theseus wrote: I think we can all agree that it understandibly makes the cops jobs hard, after all they train to shoot people with guns...what would happen if all of a sudden cops started shooting armed citizens because their training taught them to. . .
They are trying to protect themselves from these types of unfortunate accidents happening.
This is sarcasm, right?
|
TFred
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 13th, 2008 |
| Location: | Virginia USA |
| Posts: | 2465 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 05:24 pm |
|
Theseus wrote: I think we can all agree that it understandibly makes the cops jobs hard, after all they train to shoot people with guns...what would happen if all of a sudden cops started shooting armed citizens because their training taught them to. . .
They are trying to protect themselves from these types of unfortunate accidents happening.
The problem with this point is that when the LEOs show up, the good guys are putting their guns down, and most likely very fast.
TFred
Edited to change: I hate that hanging quote mark!
Last edited on Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 05:25 pm by TFred
|
JBURGII
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 05:30 pm |
|
Was I mistaken when I heard that in the "old west" the sherriff usually was going around doing city maintenance and cleanup and only came when there had already been an altercation? I always thought leos where there to clean up after the fact. I call open carry a preventive measure.
I have family in Oklahoma and they are all avid hunters and gun enthusiasts and I would be very excited if they were able to carry their firearms openly. If the argument is "How can we trust the general public with such a responsibility?" Does that not sound like guilty till proven innocent? I seem to remember something from the past... "You can't have that, you'll put an eye out!"
"I want my Red Rider BB Gun!!"
J
Attached Image (viewed 725 times):
|
FreedomJoyAdventure
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Austin, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 138 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 05:33 pm |
|
Theseus wrote: I think we can all agree that it understandibly makes the cops jobs hard, after all they train to shoot people with guns...what would happen if all of a sudden cops started shooting armed citizens because their training taught them to. . .
They are trying to protect themselves from these types of unfortunate accidents happening.
They're going to need better training. Just having a gun doesn't automatically make you a Bad Guy (where's the presumption of innocence?). Is it really that much harder not to automatically assume that everyone with a gun who isn't a cop is a bad guy? I don't buy that. As far as I know, the police in Arizona and several other states manage to get by without shooting every legally-armed citizen they see.
You've done a great job of illustrating what I was saying - that the police chief apparently doesn't trust his own officers. But that doesn't justify curtailing my rights.
|
FreedomJoyAdventure
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | Austin, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 138 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 05:41 pm |
|
CrossFire wrote: Theseus wrote: I think we can all agree that it understandibly makes the cops jobs hard, after all they train to shoot people with guns...what would happen if all of a sudden cops started shooting armed citizens because their training taught them to. . .
They are trying to protect themselves from these types of unfortunate accidents happening.
This is sarcasm, right?
+1000. You WERE being sarcastic, right? Or maybe sarcaustic?
Unfortunately I think this particular attitude prevails among folks who may not have thought the matter through to its logical conclusion completely.
|
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 05:49 pm |
|
These anti-gunners... Oklahoma 'n elsewhere... need only to LOOK at Arizona. Yeah... we have murders. Usually drug/gang related by people who couldn't have firearms legally anyway. We have attacks on the unarmed... and recently... on the ARMED. (U of A Student 2 - BG's 0) There's no Wild West shootouts... and this WAS the old Wild West.
Recent 'Helldorado' in Tombstone... Hundreds of openly armed people... in the presence of many kids. Not a single incident. I attend many of these kind'a affairs and have NEVER seen (or heard of) a gun incident.
A properly holstered sidearm or a sheathed knife (sometimes both) borne openly is no cause for LEO alarm. It's part of the CULTURE! A culture that has been lost and only now being rediscovered in areas where it's been supressed and forgotten.
|
deepdiver
Activist Member
| Joined: | Mon Apr 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Missouri USA |
| Posts: | 4755 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 06:06 pm |
|
I'm surprised those sheriffs and police chiefs can do their jobs with all that knee jerking. I think they would be better served as employees at the Ministry of Silly Walks so they can put that knee jerking to good use.
|
CrossFire
Founder's Club Member
| Joined: | Thu Nov 29th, 2007 |
| Location: | Irving, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 287 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 06:06 pm |
|
| And another thing, how is it that if I have to pull my gun and shoot in self-defense it is considered a deliberate act that I am held accountable for but if LEO does it it is just an accident? Last edited on Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 06:07 pm by CrossFire
|
Bookman
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 09:10 pm |
|
DEROS72 and I were at the range not too long ago and struck up a conversation with a couple of young cops. They're pretty cool with OC, which is good because neither one of them could hit the broad side of a barn. We were shooting the postal match targets that particular day and one of them actually said that he couldn't do that because he's a poor shot.
To give the guy credit he KNOWS he can't shoot worth beans. But it really makes me wonder that THESE are the guys society wants us to rely on for the protection they can't give.
|
Doug Huffman
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 09:27 pm |
|
Careful or you'll be accused of harshly criticizing cops.
I shot for some years at the same range that contracted with the local PD and which owner-RSO frequently compared my shooting favorably to the officers' shooting. Just like advocacy and the law, you get out of shooting pretty much what you put into it. BS in, BS out.
|
thorvaldr
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23rd, 2008 09:54 pm |
|
Personally, I am sick to death of people making a living off my tax dollars and telling me what they think public policy should be. These guys should shut up, run their departments and enforce the laws that we the people think are appropriate.
|
deanf
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 24th, 2008 05:36 am |
|
Well they've dusted off the same old tired arguments the used against concealed carry laws, I see.
|
Notso
Activist Member
| Joined: | Sun May 13th, 2007 |
| Location: | Laveen, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 343 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 24th, 2008 06:26 am |
|
| Well said thorvaldr.
|
Theseus
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 24th, 2008 01:14 pm |
|
Yes, I was being sarcastic.
I think what it really is that if OC was legal people wouldn't need to take the CC classes and pay for a permit. They won't know who has a gun or who intends to take it out with them.
I would also like to suggest that in an any case where shots have been fired a cop should assume everyone is armed and dangerous. 15 people OC vs 15 people CC. . . Hmmm....15 guns I can see and am aware of....15 guns I can't see and are more dangerous to me....
Their logic is screwed.
|
Current time is 02:38 pm | Page: 1 2   |
|
