Oklahoma Republican vetos constitutional carry.

a reply to: Whoisjohngalt

Because state's rights gives each state the right to determine how those rights apply to convicted criminals. Because business owners have the right to chose who they hire and what they pay, according to local law. I know of no state which allows criminals to be paid less than other employees because of their criminal history.

a reply to: Phage

Thats a federal law that says felons cant own guns. Nothing to do with states rights. Started in the 60's. Off topic though.
My point is, do you think it makes sense to say to someone who was sent to jail for felony assault that they only have to serve 5 years in prison, but after that they are free to go, even though they are still considered SO DANGEROUS that they cant be trusted not to use a firearm against another human being, but they can still be out where they can steal a gun , make a gun, stab someone, hit someone with a car etc?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Whoisjohngalt

Because state's rights gives each state the right to determine how those rights apply to convicted criminals. Because business owners have the right to chose who they hire and what they pay, according to local law. I know of no state which allows criminals to be paid less than other employees because of their criminal history.

Also business cant really choose who they hire. If they exclude someone based on any one of a number of arbitrary designations, they will find themselves in court.

a reply to: Whoisjohngalt

Thats a federal law that says felons cant own guns. Nothing to do with states rights.

Really?

According to the National Rifle Association's lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Washington ban felons from possessing firearms. Florida and Idaho bar felons from guns unless their rights are restored. Oregon and New York do, too, but Oregon exempts certain offenses, whereas New York adds others to the list [source: NRA-ILA].

people.howstuffworks.com...

Off topic though.

Why? You brought it up.

Also business cant really choose who they hire. If they exclude someone based on any one of a number of arbitrary designations, they will find themselves in court.

True. It is illegal to discriminate based race, color, gender, religion, age, disability, or national origin.

a reply to: Phage

en.m.wikipedia.org...
Check the prohibited person section.
Its off topic because the issue here is if these dasterdly criminals are such a danger that we need to burden everyone who wants to sell a gun to their neighbor in order to keep these bloodthirsty animals from a gun, THEN WHY ARE WE LETTING THEM OUT OF JAIL! Instead of addressing the issue and really making society better, everyone just wants to throw a bandaid on the wound and call it a day. If someone is a danger to society to the point where you think they are going to kill people, hang them or commit them to a mental institution. If its not drastic enough for either one of those, then its not serious enough to deny them their constitutional rights and treat them like second class citizens who are damned to a life of recidivism due to a scarlet letter. We should be trying to save the people who can be salvaged and making sure the rest never harm anybody else. But noooo! Lets just take half measures. Lets continue to have early releases due to prison overcrowding while at the same time criminalizing as many things as possible.Lets just pass another law about guns so we all feel more secure even though we dont enforce the laws we have. In 2010 48,000 fugatives and felons failed a background check trying to buy a gun. FORTY FOUR OF THEM WERE PROSECUTED! Lets just give away more of our rights to feel better!
Bah, rant over , im done.

a reply to: Whoisjohngalt

So, it's like legal marijuana? The state authorities won't bust you but the feds might.

originally posted by: rickymouse
That bill was going to allow people to open carry without a training course or license. It also stopped appropriate background checks on people. That bill was not actually a good bill, we need some control over who can carry in public or we will have mass chaos in the streets and country. I am not for having people brandishing a gun in public and intimidating others or making them fearful. Getting a reconciled weapon permit if eligible is all right, at least you are not tossing fear around when people can't see it. We have a decent law here in Michigan. In towns you have local ordinances for guns out in public. I think that is appropriate. If anyone could carry a gun out in the city, people would be packing all the time and those guns would create some people to fear leaving their homes. That is not right either.

You are clueless. People still have to pass NICS background check, when buying a new firearm. Many states only use NICS background check, when issuing handgun license. We already have 13 states that allow constitutional carry. We have laws about brandishing and intimidating someone with a firearm, without removing it from a hostler.

If Gov. Mary Fallin was running for reelection, this would of doomed her chances. She already ticked off all the teachers in Oklahoma, now shes ticked off pro 2nd amendment people.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Whoisjohngalt
Why exclude gun shows from background checks?
What is the rationale?

Ive bought from gun shows. Bought an ar 15 3 weeks ago at one actually

Always have filled out paperwork. Always had my check run.

a reply to: Whoisjohngalt

Jesus man. Its like you sit in my living room at night listening to me rant about things

Very. Very well put

Been to gun shows across Oklahoma and Florida every one required background checks.
========

That said you really could have just said Oklahoma Governor vetoes, she has not really represented the Left or the Right in quite some time she is completely owned and operated by whoever pays the most.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Been to gun shows across Oklahoma and Florida every one required background checks.

On that show on the National Geographic channel 'Inside secret America', they were able to purchase multiple guns at a gun show in Arizona, including a .500 S&W Magnum (god damn hand cannon... lol). All without ever needing to show id and no questions asked.

They've got a short clip of it on the National Geographic website...

Clip

Don't really have an opinion on this vetoed constitutional carry bill... But don't BS and deny facts in an attempt to give your argument credibility!

a reply to: Whoisjohngalt

Snipped because I said something stupid...

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

How is sharing personal experience denying facts.

Ive never seen nor been party to the sale of firearms without NICS. Ive seen amd been party to the transfer of firearms without NICS between family. I have my dads 30-30, and a .22lr he had.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

so they found 1 gun show that supported your argument and that means I am a liar?

How about you show me proof that all gun shows (which is what you are implying) do not require ID and a back ground check.

Every gun show I have been to required ID and a background check, prove that I am BS'ing.

I have never been to a gun show in Arizona so I have no opinion on those.

ETA: Heck every gun show I have been to had cops on site, checking IDs at the door.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Subaeruginosa

How is sharing personal experience denying facts.

I suppose it depends on how you word your "personal experience".

If you just claim that "I've always personally had to fill out paperwork", without emphasizing the fact that you can easily & legally buy a gun from a gun show or off Craigslist, without even providing id... well then its just a blatant form of propaganda... imo.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

You can also buy them out of the trunk of some dudes car. Doesnt mean its necessarily legal.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I'm sure you can buy a lot of things out of some dudes car. But referring to the 'legal' loophole of gun purchases, without the need to even provide id... which we both know exists.

Whether your prepared to openly & clearly state it or not... lol.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

Depending on the state, people who do not actually sell firearms beyond occasionally to family or other collectors do not have to have a FFL so no NICS would be run.

Its still illegal to sell a gun that you think may be fishy. And if its used in a crime itll come back to you.

originally posted by: Whoisjohngalt
Except that there are plenty of states that allow open carry without a permit, and they haven't devolved into the thunderdome yet. And plenty of states allow for permitless concealed carry, and have large cities with less gun violence than Chicago or New York which have insane gun control gun. Look, as a preference i like carrying concealed over open carry. It doesnt make the carrier a target, and no one knows they have a gun until they WANT someone to know. But that not my place to mandate how people carry. Where im from, you need to have some sort of threat against you in order to get a carry permit, and that is ridiculous because any criminal or crazy person isnt going to pay $400 and go to a police station to fill out paperwork to carry a gun to aid in their crimes. They are just going to put the gun in their pocket and go outside. That puts all of their victims at a disadvantage. And thats not right, telling good law abiding people that they need to be victims.
As for people fearing guns... well.... there is no where in the constitution that says you have the right not to be afraid. Honestly, an attacker has the advantage no matter what weapon they have. A guy walking past you could make a sharp u turn and stick a long piece of metal right in your kidneys or slit your throat, and theres very little you could do about it unless you where prepared to deal with it. That idea that someone open carrying is a bigger threat to you than the person without one is an illusion.

I hunt, often taking my pistol. You can carry a pistol anywhere except in the cities around here open carry. If they were to alter our law so cities would not have a right to stop people from having guns in the cities, many people would be intimidated and fearful. We do not need the States or feds passing laws that trump communities rights to limit the open carry. People here with a concealed permit can carry guns in town now, better than when I had a concealed permit. I have no problem with well vetted people carrying a concealed weapon, I would rather that than have them hanging in the open. That is my way of thinking, most people here without criminal records and who are citizens can apply for a concealed permit if they show they are suitable by going to a class where someone teaches them safety and responsibility and monitors how they act with the gun in their hands. I should get one again, I kind of like having a gun when I go pick berries. It has been twenty years since I last had a concealed weapon permit.

originally posted by: Whoisjohngalt
a reply to: rickymouse

Also people still have to go through background checks to buy guns at a store if that bill would have passed.

I have no problem having to get a background check for buying a handgun. I do not believe we need assault type rifles myself, some people get all wound up and feel big with that kind of gun. We need gun safety training for everyone in my opinion, fathers used to take the kids out and teach them gun safety when I grew up. Some fathers sucked at it too, some of those kids were wreckless with a gun. Proper free or cheap education is needed since we have guns. We need to be considerate to others when carrying a gun, creating fear is not good. Shooting up in the air is not good, that bullet comes down somewhere within a mile.