• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

Oklahoma House votes to eliminate license, training requirements for openly carried sidearms

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
54,519
Likes
105,265
Location
Rocky Mountains
#1
See if the rest of the govt agrees...

Oklahoma House votes to eliminate license, training requirements for openly carried sidearms
The House-passed measure does not apply to concealed weapons.

By RANDY KREHBIEL World Staff Writer

OKLAHOMA CITY — Accompanied by Bible readings and constitutional fervor, the Oklahoma House of Representatives voted Thursday to remove license and training requirements for handguns carried openly.

Rep. Jeff Coody said his House Bill 3098 acknowledges rights granted by God and the U.S. Constitution. Rep. John Bennett, R-Sapulpa, backed Coody by reading a selection of Bible verses he said empowers believers to defend themselves.

Coody argued that the Second Amendment, which he called the most important amendment in the Bill of Rights, could not be infringed upon, nor could a person’s right to self-defense.

“Is it a good idea to let anyone carry a gun, even if they don’t know how to use it or even where the safety is?” asked Rep. Emily Virgin, D-Norman.

“The key word is ‘let,’ ” said Coody. “Somehow we’ve gotten the idea that the government has to give us permission to exercise our freedoms. That is totally antithetical to me.”

The bill excludes felons from open carry, but not people under protective order. This caused some concern, even among gun-rights supporters, and may be addressed when the bill reaches the Senate.

Rep. Mike Brown, D-Tahlequah, noted that the state requires people to learn to drive to obtain a driver’s license, and asked why a person shouldn’t be required to learn how to operate a gun before carrying one in public.

“Because driving is privilege,” replied Coody. “The Second Amendment is a constitutional right.”

“But what about my safety?” Brown asked. “Doesn’t the government have a responsibility to protect me?”

“No,” replied Coody.​

Bennett and Coody said more guns means less crime, but Rep. Cory Williams, D-Stillwater, disputed the assertion and said rapes in Oklahoma are at a 10-year high since the state’s concealed-carry law was passed.

The House spent two hours on HB 3098, which was scaled back to include only openly carried firearms. Originally, it would have removed license and training requirements for concealed weapons as well.

Coody said he agreed to modify the bill because the original version would have cost the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, which issues gun licenses, 15 to 18 percent of its revenue.

Coody said far fewer people would choose to carry openly than concealed.

The bill passed 73-15, with 13 members not voting.

Also Thursday:
  • A vote on an Internet sales tax measure, HB 2531, was held open a half hour while the requisite 51 votes for passage were rounded up. Votes normally take no more than 10 minutes and usually less.
The bill, by Rep. Chad Caldwell, R-Enid, is intended to give the state Oklahoma Tax Commission greater authority to collect sales and use taxes on Internet sales. In most cases, the payment of those taxes is now essentially voluntary.

Opponents say attempts to collect those taxes amount to a tax increase. Caldwell and others maintain the bill is an attempt to enforce an existing tax, and that non-compliance is putting brick-and-mortar merchants at a disadvantage.

Attempts such as Caldwell’s have been backed by most business organizations and many state leaders.

HB 2531 passed 51-39, with 11 members not voting.
  • A bill sought by the Tulsa Metropolitan Utility Authority survived broad opposition to pass 59-36.
HB 2446, by Rep. Terry O’Donnell, R-Catoosa, specifies that protection of the state’s water resources is a compelling state interest.

The bill is in response to State Question 777, the so-called Right to Farm Act, which the TMUA fears could be “misinterpreted” in a way that is detrimental to water quality in northeastern Oklahoma.

SQ 777 would prohibit state and local governments from interfering in “accepted” agricultural operations, except in cases of “compelling state interest.”

Supporters — principally the Oklahoma Farm Bureau — say SQ 777 is needed to prevent animal rights and environmental groups from interfering with production agriculture.

Opponents say the state question is really meant to protect large-scale intensive feeding operations from scrutiny and regulation.

Randy Krehbiel 918-581-8365

randy.krehbiel@tulsaworld.com

http://m.tulsaworld.com/news/capito...be0-4adf-56ca-8424-3726304d6187.html?mode=jqm
 

JayDubya

pies klasy robotniczej
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
6,027
Likes
9,045
#2
I like this Jeff Coody guy. If I lived in OKC I'd buy him a drink
 

Someone_else

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,221
Likes
4,692
#3
I like this Jeff Coody guy. If I lived in OKC I'd buy him a drink
Yep. A "right" overrules some whimpering coward's claim for an unclear and unavailable protection from the government.
 

Scorpio

Hunter of Chin Li's Boo Hoo Flu
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
32,742
Likes
47,723
#4
Coody said he agreed to modify the bill because the original version would have cost the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, which issues gun licenses, 15 to 18 percent of its revenue.
Note there are instances of them raising taxes also in there,

Along with passing bills to raise taxes to include internet purchases,
 

Scorpio

Hunter of Chin Li's Boo Hoo Flu
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
32,742
Likes
47,723
#5
Rep. Mike Brown, D-Tahlequah, noted that the state requires people to learn to drive to obtain a driver’s license, and asked why a person shouldn’t be required to learn how to operate a gun before carrying one in public.

“Because driving is privilege,” replied Coody. “The Second Amendment is a constitutional right.”

“But what about my safety?” Brown asked. “Doesn’t the government have a responsibility to protect me?”

“No,” replied Coody.
I disagree that driving is a privilege granted by the state of nothing,
They do this to protect their revenue cow in all states,

When point of fact, it is part of our basic freedoms to come and go as we please however we please,
 

Hystckndle

SWEATEQUITYIS$$$
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
8,479
Likes
11,080
Location
Central Florida
#6
I disagree that driving is a privilege granted by the state of nothing,
They do this to protect their revenue cow in all states,

When point of fact, it is part of our basic freedoms to come and go as we please however we please,
I have pondered that a lot. And have dished out $ for a ticket, guy acted like an asshat too....not wearing seatbelt in 1985 giant Dodge Van I have after stopping for an errand and was 1km from home...totally just forgot...and I always wear as ive been in a roll over and have also witnessed one very closely with ejections.
We all drive on pretty much publically funded roads, federal funding too. Its the only way I can think about it without being totally frosted all the time. Some of them here are now profit, outside investors. ..THATS starting to get me going again....ehhh....maybe I wont start going down this rabbit hole today....itll be hard to act normal...
 

gringott

"Veteran of the Battle of Knob Creek"
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
16,695
Likes
24,448
Location
Stable
#7
The age old right to travel is constantly under attack over the years.
There was a citizen uprising about it in Kentucky in the 1800's.