|
|
|
OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Oklahoma > Oklahoma Police Groups Say Gun Carry Must be Limited to Privilege of Concealing
|
|
||
| OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Oklahoma > Oklahoma Police Groups Say Gun Carry Must be Limited to Privilege of Concealing
|
|||
| Moderated by: jpierce | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
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 03:33 pm by Mike |
|||||||||
|
TFred Regular Member
|
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, 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
|
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
|
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 05:34 pm by SlackwareRobert |
|||||||||
|
FreedomJoyAdventure Regular Member 
|
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 
|
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 
|
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. . . This is sarcasm, right? |
|||||||||
|
TFred Regular Member
|
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. . . 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 06:25 pm by TFred |
|||||||||
|
JBURGII Regular Member 
|
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 689 times): |
|||||||||
|
FreedomJoyAdventure Regular Member
|
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'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
|
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. . . +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 
|
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 
|
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
|
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 07:07 pm by CrossFire |
|||||||||
|
Bookman Regular Member
|
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 
|
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 
|
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 
|
Well they've dusted off the same old tired arguments the used against concealed carry laws, I see. |
|||||||||
|
Notso Activist Member
|
Well said thorvaldr. |
|||||||||
|
Theseus Founder's Club Member
|
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. |
|||||||||
|
judgedby12notcarriedby6 Regular Member
|
HardChrome wrote: 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 in all states that allow it |
|||||||||
|
ixtow Founder's Club Member
|
Theseus wrote: Yes, I was being sarcastic. If there was a shooting, none of the concealed weapons would be concealed anymore anyway, right? If there is an active BG shooter, certainly he's not shooting from inside his pants pocket? If there is a responsible armed citizen, he's not returning fire from inside his jacket, is he? the concealment argument always fails when it comes to a matter of use, because the weapon cannot be concealed and used (effectively) at the same time. It also offers no deterrent while invisible. There is no valid argument in support of Open Carry "causing problems." It's just another vague reference with no foundation used to make small minds pop before they think it through rationally and logically. All evidence shows it's even more useful for preventing crime than CC is, and we still haven't seen the streets running like rivers of blood from "old west" shootouts. A return to the 'old west' would be a welcome improvement over what we already have. ;-) I wonder why no one has pointed this out yet? |
|||||||||
|
riverrat10k Regular Member 
|
+1 "anti's don't trust themselves with guns." Now we are getting to the heart of the matter! They are so screwed up that gun=violence in their minds. In our minds gun=protection+fun! |
|||||||||
|
riverrat10k Regular Member
|
Oh, and I believe oc is legel in some form in what, 42 states? |
|||||||||
|
2a4all Regular Member 
|
So if we didn't have OC, we wouldn't be returning to the Wild West. The news that I see on TV and read in the paper seems to report a lot of shootings. But I don't see anyone OCing, so these perps must be packing concealed, right? Are we not back in the Wild West now only because two individuals don't face off with each other in the street at high noon? I guess an Old West "driveby" wasn't so popular because it's a lot harder to shoot someone from the back of a running horse using a SA revolver than it is to shoot from the window of a speeding limo with a Tech9. While these midday shootouts were supposedly happening daily (one near you), they were insignificant compared to the violence perpetrated in the sophisticated, civilized cities of the East (Boston, NY, Philly, DC, etc.). Since the "cowboy gunfights" got all the press (novels, etc), everyone seems to think that we were safer Back East then, and clearly, just as (un)safe now. There was a whole fashion industry centered around the fine art of weapons concealment which allowed "gentlemen" to put brigands in their place with an air of sophistication. And a "gentleman" always did the proper thing, right? Only crude ruffians would openly carry a gun around. After all, what civilized person doesn't dress properly? Maybe the antiOC folks are just looking for civility with their heads in the sand. |
|||||||||
|
Alwayspacking Activist Member 
|
These LE's are not speaking on what they know to be true, but they are speaking out of their own fears. I OC about 90% of the time, and all this negativity that LEO talk of has not happened as one might think . Yet my OC does not cause anyone to run or of fear when they see me. Also how many people do the LEO expect to see OCing on one giving day? I have yet to see one people OC in my city or any other city for that matter. It's not like everyone in society will OC, only a few. And if the entire society did OC there would be less crime. Think about it, a Criminal sees a walmart parking with 13 people with pistols on their hip, and he is alone or with one more guy, I do not think they will commit any crime there. And with training being required, there are lots of states that do not require training for CC so what is the difference in requiring training for OC? All this shows is that the LEO want to control our 2nd amendment, and it shows their own fears of OC. |
|||||||||
|
frommycolddeadhands Regular Member 
|
deepdiver wrote: 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. +1000000. LOL, funniest thing I've heard all day! |
|||||||||
|
ixtow Founder's Club Member
|
frommycolddeadhands wrote: deepdiver wrote: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. Unfortunately, those knees are connected to our wallets and rights... When they jerk around, we lose both. |
|||||||||
|
oklaccer Regular Member 
|
It is sad that more from Oklahoma aren't getting involved in this public debate. If the elected officials don't trust the very people that put them in office, then the people made a bad choice and need to correct the mistake at the next election, or start a recall petition. Once again the naysayers resort to fear mongering and false assumpions to press their case. We need to look at other states that allow open carry (my experience has been in VA) to see what the outcome will be. During the early days of our current election cycle I posed this issue with all the candidates. I got reactions anywhere from outright non reply to refusing to take a stand to full support for open carry and TRTBA. I think too many of the sheriffs and police chief positions are political stepping stones, so the people that run for and hold these offices lack the guts to stand up for what is right and just. We need a "NONE OF THE ABOVE" on ballots. my .02 |
|||||||||
|
hightecrebel Regular Member
|
oklaccer wrote: It is sad that more from Oklahoma aren't getting involved in this public debate. I know a number of people in the OKC/Norman/Choctaw area who support the idea of OC. The only problem being, for them and myself, is that we're all military members with legal residence in other states. I must admit, I find it amusing that in the State of Maine I could OC a semi-auto pistol before I was 18, but I couldn't even have my 1911 sent out to me here in OK until after I turned 21. |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
hightecrebel wrote: oklaccer wrote:It is sad that more from Oklahoma aren't getting involved in this public debate. What is the age to possess a handgun in OK?? Cite? |
|||||||||
|
TheMrMitch Regular Member 
|
"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." That's called PROJECTION and most antis are afflicted with it. |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
+1 VERY TRUE! |
|||||||||
|
ClevelandCarry Activist Member
|
Basically, we are just wanting the opportunity to vote to allow citizens of Oklahoma to have the right to the same type of carry as LEO's. Quite simply, a petition is being gathered for the opportunity to make it legal to OC in Oklahoma, and if the people vote "yes" on it, then that's simply the way it will be. You don't even want to get me started on how I have to have a background check each time I buy a firearm, despite have a conceal carry license, C&R FFL license, and a spotless record (aside from a few traffic tickets) yet a repeat offender with DUI's can buy alcohol without producing a driver's license, may purchase vehicles, and even get insured. Last edited on Fri Oct 31st, 2008 01:59 pm by ClevelandCarry |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member
|
ClevelandCarry wrote: Basically, we are just wanting the opportunity to vote to allow citizens of Oklahoma to have the right to the same type of carry as LEO's. You were born with that Right. Government doesn't grant 'Rights'... just recognizes 'em. Police don't carry as a Right... they carry as a Duty. It's a professional requirement. CC is by permit... or license... which is only to carry concealed... NOT to carry. Bearing arms is a Right. What States do is limit the exercise of the Right... or forbid the free exercise of the Right completely. The public (gummint) school system (that I and many are the products of) were (and prob'ly still are) indoctrinated that gummint 'gives' citizens certain Rights. This is false socialist teaching. I argued this point when I was 13 years old in Jr. High School (Middle School) back in 1956. 'Got sent to the Principle's office for bein' 'disruptive'. That set my political awareness and beliefs for the rest of my life. I'd never heard of the 'Left'... or 'Liberals'... 'Progressives' or even 'Socialists' (Other than the Nazi's) at that time... but I knew what Marxists, Bolsheviks 'n Communists were about. |
|||||||||