I'm sure this has been talked about before but does anyone know if the Jenks river walk is now tribal land or is it just property that the tribe purchased? Had a co worker mention that a light horse police officer spotted his ccw and came and told ho he couldn't carry there because it was federal land.
Tribal lands aren't mentioned in the SDA
posted via Tapatalk
posted via Tapatalk
How can it be federal if the land was purchased by the Muscogee Nation?
Last I heard the land has not yet received sovereign designation so I wouldn't think it's status has changed much. I could be wrong.
Last I heard the land has not yet received sovereign designation so I wouldn't think it's status has changed much. I could be wrong.
Last edited:
I would suggest that the co-worker do a better job of concealed carry. 
[/QUOTE]
I agree with MadDogs. I also agree with Burk Cornelius that the SDA dose not specifically mention tribal lands. KOPBET, you may find that even though the tirbe bought the land, the land is actually owned by the federal government and is held in trust for the tribe. But, if the light horse police dudes are running security for the land owner, the land owner can make any rules they want about folks totting guns on their property. I think your co worker should just hide his roscoe a bit better.
[/QUOTE]I agree with MadDogs. I also agree with Burk Cornelius that the SDA dose not specifically mention tribal lands. KOPBET, you may find that even though the tirbe bought the land, the land is actually owned by the federal government and is held in trust for the tribe. But, if the light horse police dudes are running security for the land owner, the land owner can make any rules they want about folks totting guns on their property. I think your co worker should just hide his roscoe a bit better.
Not an attorney (criminal, title, or otherwise) but as I understand things: If they still own it in fee, it's Tribal property. If they've transferred it into Trust with the BIA, then it has that magical "federal" forcefield around it. You know the one: It keeps maniacs from shooting up the place.
A quick search of the record online will tell you that The Muscogee Creek Nation owns it. So, as far as the property itself goes, the Lighthorse guy is just wrong about it being "federal property". It isn't. At least, that's according to the Tulsa County Assessor's website today.
A quick search of the record online will tell you that The Muscogee Creek Nation owns it. So, as far as the property itself goes, the Lighthorse guy is just wrong about it being "federal property". It isn't. At least, that's according to the Tulsa County Assessor's website today.
I do business with the property company that runs Riverwalk. The Muscogee Creek Nation owns the land - it's not federal land. Since it's not a casino, I still carry out there and haven't really worried about it. But I'm a big fan of concealed is concealed (except in strict no gun zones)
yeah, keep concealed
Even a casino is not prohibited. They can put up a gun buster sign just like any business. But they are not on statutory "no carry" list
posted via Tapatalk
Is there some kind of case law that supports this? I'm just curious, as I guarantee you the tribe will come down very very hard and say otherwise. I wouldn't want to risk the legal ramifications without some kind of statute or case law where this has been established. The tribes generally take the view that they are independent and make their own rules - the point where local police are not allowed on tribal property without specifically being requested, in some instances. This is what the BIA police I have interacted with have told me in that past. It would be great to know otherwise, but personally, I seldom, if ever, have any reason to set foot on tribal land.
Similar threads
