Oklahoma Rifle Association Opposes Oklahoma Open Carry Bill 129
Yukon, OK –-(Ammoland.com)- SB 129, sponsored by Senator Steven Russell R-Oklahoma City, would give anyone 18 years of age or older the right to openly carry a gun without a license or training.
The Oklahoma Rifle Association wrote a letter to state representatives opposing the open carry measure because it violates a federal age requirement of 21 to purchase guns.
Dear Representative:
On Saturday March 19th the Officers and Board Members of the Oklahoma Rifle Association held our Board Meeting in Shawnee OK. At this meeting pending firearms legislation at the Oklahoma Legislature was discussed.
It was the intent of the Oklahoma Rifle Association to remain in a position of neutrality on the “Open Carry” legislation as many of our members support some form of open carry. The Officers and Board Members of the ORA are in agreement with the “Open Carry” concept but, after much discussion, the majority of the Board Members and Officers, voted to oppose Senate Bill 129 by Senator Russell and Representative Osborne. This bill, in it’s present form, would allow those 18 years of age and older, to purchase and carry loaded Rifles, Shotguns and Handguns openly in a scabbard, with a sling, or a handgun in a holster, anywhere not in violation of Title 21, subsection A of Section 1277, without a back ground check and without training.
The Officers and Board Members are in opposition to SB 129 for these reasons:
First, The purchase of handguns by persons under the age of 21 is in violation of existing Federal Law. Second, Allowing citizens, trained or untrained, to carry Rifles and Shotguns either in a scabbard or with a sling on city streets and into business establishments will create an atmosphere of hostility and distrust, not to mention create fear in those in our society who have an aversion to any type of firearm. Third, The apprehension, created for the Law Enforcement Officers by the open carrying of long guns could create situations resulting in unnecessary use of deadly force. For these reasons we ask you to vote against SB 129 when it comes to the floor of the House of Representatives. Sincerely,
Don Scott, President, Oklahoma Rifle Association
Paul W. Abel,
Legislative Director, Oklahoma Rifle Association
Oklahoma Proposed Open Carry Bill SB 129
About Oklahoma Rifle Association:
The mission of the ORA is to protect and preserve the shooting sports at the state level. ORA will promote and improve the shooting sports by sponsoring marksmanship training and competitions throughout the state of Oklahoma.
ORA will work for the rights of the gun owner, shooter, collector, hunter, archer, black powder enthusiast. ORA will support the free exchange of ideas, information and education related to gun ownership, shooting, hunting, firearms and related topics. Visit: www.oklarifle.org
The reason why they are opposing this is because it will take money away from them if people can carry legal without a permit. When we purchase our firearms we go throw a back ground check so they are trying to pull the wool over our eyes. But what they don’t seem to understand is the shooters pay money to us their range and they are supporting them If it wasn’t for the people the ORA would not be around.
I just realized for the first time that the ORA emblem has a rainbow in the Indian’s feathers. How Thweet!
I have just sent an email to the NRA and ORA requesting refund of my past 12 years of membership fees, since they have apparently been using my money against me and my rights all along. Anyone know the 2A record of Practical Shooters Assn. and Gun Owners of America? Those might be good groups to join.
49, 89, 199 what difference does your age matter, if you don’t support others 2nd amendment rights, why should anyone support yours?
Open carry might scare a few hoplophobes, at least until they get used to it, we’ve allowed guns to be stigmatized, making them visible daily and people used to them would help cure the problem.
I agree with Mr. Baker. We have to stick together. If someone, of any age, comes into a restaurant or any other place and I can see that they are “with a gun”, then I am forewarned. And Martin your observation that many young persons are not responsible is a wise observation, too.
I as a NRA member understand to a point!I as a 49 yr old would feel uncomfortable if a younger person came in to a restaurant with a gun.A lot of young people are responsible but many are not.Thats why they stomp the gas and peel out at a stopsign.
I was looking to join the ORA so I could buy a CMP Garand, but after reading this, I don’t feel they deserve my money or membership.
Come to the Wanenmacher gun show in Tusla this weekend there will be plenty of Garands for sale! See you there!
To Stu, Doug, and Jim.
I and the ORA are not saying there will be “blood in the streets”. We are saying there will be a “backlash” from the local and State Chamber of Commerce along with the Hoplophobes (yes we do have a few here) for elimination of OC and CC along with Oklahoma’s “Firearm Premption” laws. Yes gentlemen, the ORA IS the group who advocated and guided these bills to law, with little help from outside sources other than the NRA ILA rep.
Once the machine is set in motion to reverse the advances the ORA has made in CC, Premption, castle doctrine, and selfdefense in our state, the OC advocates will never assist in stopping the machine or even slowing it down. The ORA will be as always, left to clean up the mess while those who created the mess sit around their computers and gripe.
In My Opinion:
Yet another organization showing their true colors – and these people are affiliated with the NRA?!?
I personally would like to see responsible individuals go through training – but a Right is a Right. Period. If you carry and wrongfully harm another, there are laws in place to deal with you. So it is your responsibility to exercise your rights responsibly…
And any group against any law that further seeks to restore and protect our Rights as Americans doesn’t deserve the public’s support…
My goodness – it sounded to me as though the “ORA” was saying there would be “blood in the streets”!
The classic “Fudd” response from ORA.
Not good enough!
Training and education will negate those law enforcement concerns.
Since when is exercise of a right contingent to any ‘fear’ which might be experienced by those with an ‘aversion’?
It is legal for an 18 year old to purchase and own a handgun in the state of Oklahoma.
The age 21 law only applies to people who buy from a FFL.
There is no law that says an 18 year old can not buy or own a handgun.
Most people will * not * be carrying a rifle or shot openly down the street!
E Zach Lee-Wright,
First, I suggest you ask an FFL dealer to sell you a handgun if you are under the age of 21, see what he says.
Second yes, “you” can sell a handgun to someone under 21 if it’s a private sale and if that “someone under 21” goes and commits a crime with said handgun I’d hazard a guess in most states You could be charged as an accessory to the crime or possibly with conspiracy, you might beat the charge depending on the state you life in but, you won’t like the cost.
As for your sophomoric “stoner” comments. Grow up.
Hey, we have a drug use problem with the OK Rifle Assoc. board. Their letter says “First, The purchase of handguns by persons under the age of 21 is in violation of existing Federal Law”.
This is total stonerville. The federal law does not set the minimum age to purchase handguns at 21. It sets the age for a licensed dealer to sell a handgun as 21 and older but an eighteen year old can lawfully purchase a handgun from an individual as long as the purchase is within the state of residence and state law does not forbid it.
Lay of the weed Don.
And I am….. E. Zach Lee-Wright
I agree with ORA. This is one “Right” we should limit where ever we can.
Hello Dale;
Thanks for your comments, this is not an attack on ORA it is just that we have had our gun rights taken away for so many years that a bill like this would expand gun rights.
The issues with gang bangers you are talking about are already settled law, either they can own a gun and carry it or they are criminals breaking the law. Which is a law enforcement issue.
We can not punish people for crimes they may commit or punish law abiding citizens for crimes others may commit.
I have a question to all those who attack the “gun rights” groups like the Oklahoma Rifle Association for opposing “open carry” by anyone, 18 years of age and over, as Oklahoma SB129 will do without a background check.
Why do you support the open carrying of firearms by criminals and gangbangers?
I’m not surprised that the Oklahoma NRA state affiliate organization, the Oklahoma Rifle Association came out against Open Carry. The board members of the NRA affiliate in California, CRPA, are also opposed to Open Carry.
These State NRA organizations are dominated by the “shooting” faction of the NRA (target shooters) who are vehemently opposed to one exercising his right to self-defense by the only constitutional means recognized by the US Supreme Court in Heller and McDonald – Open Carry.
Those who have bothered to read the Heller decision know that the US Supreme Court gave as an example of a reasonable restriction on the carrying of arms in public was a ban on concealed carry. The one exception they noted was when one was traveling.
The target shooters controlled the NRA in 1968 when the NRA endorsed the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968. In 1977, the Second Amendment faction gained nominal control when Harlan Carter was elected and was somewhat effective in fighting gun control laws during the tenure of Neal Knox.
The NRA has now endorsed the D.C., gun ban bill H.R. 645 and according to the City Attorney for Redondo Beach, California; his illegal ban on Open Carry is thanks to NRA lawyer Chuck Michel.
Instead of defunding the BATFE, the NRA seeks to modernize it. From 1787 to 1968 we got along just fine without them interfering with our right to keep and carry arms. We can get along without them today.
Memo to NRA – “Stop helping us!”
How is a voting member of the NRA supposed to know who is in the “target shooters faction” or the “Second Amendment faction” or any other faction so that he can vote properly?
WTF When I read this I fell of my chair!
Why wouldn’t they support any expansion of gun rights.
If it became a problem they could always work backwards amending the law if need to.??
Why would they not support any expansion of gun rights?
This is clearly a case of a very small state level organization that is not up to date on the rapid expansion of constitutional carry.
They probably have a lot of older members and not inline with the more recent concealed and open carry movements.
This is bad for the Open Carry movement as this is exactly the thing anti-gunners will jump on and point to as reasonable gun control.
They would be doing more good if they took no position at all and said nothing.