Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Tulsa's new Gathering Place Park to ban guns
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tulsanewb" data-source="post: 3154906" data-attributes="member: 2133"><p>Ah, that makes more sense. Yes, it does definitely read that way now, and more so, I just checked the SDA and it shows the same in the published version. I stand corrected, and should have checked the SDA as well as the link. That is very disappointing that exceptions keep getting carved out. I did find one lawyer's <a href="https://robleslawfirmokc.com/recent-changes-to-the-oklahoma-self-defense-act-effective-november-1-2017/" target="_blank">website</a> talking about it and saying that it's under the same category as walking past a sign in terms of penalty, and while IANAL and he is; that's not a risk I feel like taking, plus I don't like to give money to those who don't want the business of concealed carriers. </p><p></p><p>As for the liability law, I definitely like Tennessee's version much better than ours, but at least ours gives immunity for allowing carriers as well. But, Tennessee's makes more sense, allow someone to be responsible for their own security, or you are; not neither.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tulsanewb, post: 3154906, member: 2133"] Ah, that makes more sense. Yes, it does definitely read that way now, and more so, I just checked the SDA and it shows the same in the published version. I stand corrected, and should have checked the SDA as well as the link. That is very disappointing that exceptions keep getting carved out. I did find one lawyer's [URL='https://robleslawfirmokc.com/recent-changes-to-the-oklahoma-self-defense-act-effective-november-1-2017/']website[/URL] talking about it and saying that it's under the same category as walking past a sign in terms of penalty, and while IANAL and he is; that's not a risk I feel like taking, plus I don't like to give money to those who don't want the business of concealed carriers. As for the liability law, I definitely like Tennessee's version much better than ours, but at least ours gives immunity for allowing carriers as well. But, Tennessee's makes more sense, allow someone to be responsible for their own security, or you are; not neither. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Tulsa's new Gathering Place Park to ban guns
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom