Fallin vetoes another gun bill?

[tRidiot]

I'm not familiar with the problem in Norman... is there some issue where they wouldn't allow citizens to carry on a public street? If so, I think that would be quite illegal. Maybe that's what the lawsuit is about from OK2A stems from? If so, then OK2A is 100% right, Fallin is vetoing this and using a totally invalid excuse for doing so - as it's not an issue of public streets at all.

Politicians... jeez. Although I did just hear back from my State Rep that IF they get to have a veto override vote, he will be voting for the override. My State Senator is usually much less responsive when I email him. There is usually not much if any response.

 

[Shadowrider]

I'm not familiar with the problem in Norman... is there some issue where they wouldn't allow citizens to carry on a public street? If so, I think that would be quite illegal. Maybe that's what the lawsuit is about from OK2A stems from? If so, then OK2A is 100% right, Fallin is vetoing this and using a totally invalid excuse for doing so - as it's not an issue of public streets at all.

Politicians... jeez. Although I did just hear back from my State Rep that IF they get to have a veto override vote, he will be voting for the override. My State Senator is usually much less responsive when I email him. There is usually not much if any response.

I think that's just the way the Senate works. All I got back was them wanting my address. I sent that and have heard nothing else.

And yes Norman did ban CCW and OC by "hiding behind a lease". OK2A filed suit and got that changed. As I understand it, this bill is to prevent that from happening again.

 

[SMS]

I think that's just the way the Senate works. All I got back was them wanting my address. I sent that and have heard nothing else.

And yes Norman did ban CCW and OC by "hiding behind a lease". OK2A filed suit and got that changed. As I understand it, this bill is to prevent that from happening again.

Right, at least that's the way it was sold and the way it is reflected in the NRA memo. If you read the actual text of the the final bill, it wouldn't do that at all, unless I'm missing a key piece.

Here's the operative piece from the final version sent to the Governor.

C. A property owner, tenant, employer, place of worship or
business entity may prohibit any person from carrying a concealed or
unconcealed firearm on the property, unless the property is within
the specific exclusions provided for in paragraph 4 of subsection B
of Section 1277 of this title. If the building or property is open
to the public, the property owner, tenant, employer, place of
worship or business entity shall post signs on or about the property
stating such prohibition.

 

[tRidiot]

Yeah, I don't know what got changed, but the current iteration is merely an affirmation of the SDA already. Anything to do with Norman prohibiting carry on public streets is also already covered and should be settled by the lawsuit, I would think - some caselaw would be great to get on the books in support.

 

[KOPBET]

Right, at least that's the way it was sold and the way it is reflected in the NRA memo. If you read the actual text of the the final bill, it wouldn't do that at all, unless I'm missing a key piece.

Here's the operative piece from the final version sent to the Governor.

Exactly. This SB41 changes nothing in regards to 1277 except verbiage regarding signage. Sheesh.

 

[Buzzgun]

Did you guys read "paragraph 4 of subsection B of Section 1277" of the SDA??

It says "Any property designated by a city, town, county, or state, governmental authority as a park, recreational area, or fairgrounds; provided nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to authorize any entry by a person in possession of a concealed or unconcealed handgun into any structure, building, or office space which is specifically prohibited by the provisions of subsection A of this section."

If you fill in the blanks, you find that SB41 would still allow a property owner, tenant, employer, place of worship or business entity to prohibit any person from carrying a concealed or unconcealed firearm on the property, unless the property is designated by a city, town, county, or state, governmental authority as a park, recreational area, or fairgrounds.

Bottom line, it would prevent private entities from renting/leasing public areas, that are open to concealed or open carry, and declaring them off limits.

 

[SMS]

Yes, that's the point. It can and has been argued that entities renting fairgrounds and parks are already excluded from banning lawful carry on those properties but the existing law and SB41 do not address city streets or "any public area" as has been postured in the media (Both pro and con press releases).

For example, as it is written SB41 would not have provided much, if any, additional relief in the music festival case.

 

[dennishoddy]

Didn't know that at the time I posted it. At least my post has a new number direct to the Governors office to use that wasn't in my phone list.

Dennis she already vetoed it.

Yes I emailed Bingman and my senator and told them what I thought. Will do the house guys later when I get a break from work.

Governor May Veto SB41









Today is Governor Fallin's last day to sign SB41 into law. We are worried she may bow to pressure from the OKC Chamber of Commerce to veto the bill. After her veto of three 2nd Amendment bills last year, we cannot take for granted that she will do the right thing and sign the bill, especially in the face of the Chamber's pressure.

Please call Governor Fallin and strongly (but politely) urge her to sign SB41 into law. You can reach the Governor at (405) 521-2342. It is critical that she hear from you TODAY. When you get through, press 2 to speak to a secretary (DO NOT press 1 for the comment line as she may not get your message in time).
SB41 was amended late in the process with language that will bring an end to cities abusing the 2nd Amendment by prohibiting the lawful and peaceful carrying of firearms during city festivals on city streets, such as was the case with the Norman Music Fest.

 

[Dave70968]

When I called, she'd already vetoed it. The operator who took my call was quite snippy about it. I casually mentioned that I'd keep it in mind at her next election (yes, I know she's term-limited); the operator--again, quite snippily--pointed out that she's not up for election. I returned with "I'm sure she'll run for something again sometime."

Mary Fallin has never lost an election. She's long past due.

 

[SMS]

I'd like to see comments from someone in the know (like our resident OK2A folks) on why this bill is/was being presented as something it appears to not be...or some help pointing out what I'm missing.

Even as it was written, at least it would've been good to have the fairgrounds thing cleared up once and for all...even though I've carried there every year.