Governor Kevin Stitt can officially mark one pandering campaign promise off his hit list!
Yesterday afternoon, he eagerly signed HB 2597 like it was a widow’s foreclosure notice. Known as either “Constitutional Carry” or “Permitless Carry”– it depends on your political leanings – the law will allow just about any mind-warped patriot to freely and proudly carry dangerous, man-killing weapons in public.
Here are the details via NewsOK.com:
Just hours after final legislative approval was granted, Gov. Kevin Stitt signed a bill Wednesday that will allow Oklahoma residents to carry a firearm in public with no training or license.
House Bill 2597, the so-called Constitutional Carry bill, advanced out of the Senate on Wednesday afternoon by a 40-6 vote. With Stitt’s signature, the law takes effect Nov. 1…
The bill allows people age 21 and older — and military service members and veterans age 18 years and older — to carry guns either concealed or unconcealed with no permit or training. As under current law, felons and those adjudicated to be mentally ill will not be allowed to carry firearms.
Although this is a contrived “looking for a solution where there isn’t a problem” type of law that panders to one base so it can gloat to the other, the law doesn’t really bother me. You want permitless carry? Go for it. Have fun. Knowing that someone doesn’t have to play the security theatre game and pass an easy test to carry a firearm doesn’t make me feel any more or any less safe. Do you really think we’re now going to see a rush of untrained, gun-illiterate yahoos rushing to H&H just so they can carry an AR 15 on their back?
If you believe what my state representative had to say, the answer to that question is “Yes.”
It may not make Oklahoma a Top 10 state, but it does help solidify our status as Top 10 destination for gun nuts, militiamen and confederate sympathizers who are prepping for the next American Civil War. Is that a negative statistic?
Anyway, I can understand why the liberal folks, especially party-loyal Democrats like Cyndi Munson, are against the law. As I mentioned, it doesn’t really solve any problems, and in a partisan sense, it’s an easy win for the Republicans.
That being said, I still think they’re overreacting, and playing into the GOPs hands by getting mad about it. This law isn’t that bad. To make those folks in the liberal Oklahoma echo chamber feel better, here are 5 Reasons Why Constitutional / Permitless Carry is Okay…
1. Less Government Regulation and Bureaucracy
Back in 2018, Hayley wrote about her experience taking a concealed carry class. For the most part, it basically seemed like a waste of $70 and a Saturday. Considering 99% of law abiding people who want to carry a gun without a permit would likely pass the class anyway, why even have it? It’s just an unnecessary regulation to make you feel safe.
–
2. It will make life easier for policemen
Although law enforcement groups are against the bill, I think it will make life easier for policemen. For example, in the past, if they saw someone running with a gun while carrying a bag of cash, they had to assume the person was a dangerous criminal who just robbed a bank. Now they can just assume it’s a law-abiding citizen who’s trying to get to the bank before it closes, and let them move along with their day.
–
3. Now the blind can more easily carry firearms
Earlier this year, State Rep. Andy Fugate shared this Facebook status in opposition to a bill. I guess a blind student asked if she could carry a gun in public when she was 21 and…
I did what Fugate suggested and thought about it for a moment. Good for the girl! Blind folks have rights, too, and as Sandra Bullock taught us in Bird Box, you don’t have to be able to see to have good aim.
–
4. Mary Fallin vetoed the law
A very similar bill sailed through the Oklahoma House and Senate, only to be vetoed by Mary Fallin. Has she ever done anything right? Maybe the law isn’t so bad after all.
–
5. It will make it easier to spot who has a small penis
If jacked up trucks and camo gear didn’t do the trick, this law surely will.
–
my only concern was the price tag states, were now placing on our rights as citizens , and no where in the Constitution does it say, we as citizens must pay for these . To tell you the truth ,I’m sick of the money factor and infringement . If you think the criminals are going to give up their guns or the drug runners or Gang banger, think again . it has become a dangerous world out there and most likely it is the innocent that suffer , and if we can stop but one of these , then citizens have done their jobs .
Very well said and succinct. Did you ever think about becoming a professional writer?
A couple thoughts on “constitutional” carry:
1. The right ot carry and possess a handgun or other firearm as we think about it today was not established until the US Supreme Court’s decision in Heller, which was published in 2008. There, the court established it as a “fundamental” right. Until that time, the law was pretty well established that the government had authority to regulate how, who, etc. can possess a firearm. The idea that this something that’s been around (“god-given” or what the founding fathers intended) is just patently wrong.
2. I dont have a problem with responsible gun ownership. Putting a dangerous weapon in someone’s hands wihtout training is irresponsible. We require people to get a permit to drive. Before you any yahoo says driving is not in the constitution: first, see above and, second, the freedom of movement is a a fundamental right.
3. The answer to reducing crime is not more guns. That’s like sayign the way to reduce drunk driving is to let more people drink and drive. Total nonsense.
4. I dont have any illusions that this will increase mass shootings. But I also dont think its going to reduce crime. If I get shgot by some dumbass who is showing off or trying to be a superhero, I’m going to be really pissed. I should also be able to sue the shit out of them if they havent had any training on how to handle the gun.
Regardless whether they had training or not you WILL be able to sue the shit out of them (if you’re still alive to do so), but I hear ya. I have around 10 guns with only three of those for personal protections, the others for hunting however, I thinks there should be AT LEAST a 4 hours class on safety and handling. If it was up to me it would be a two day course. Letting Billy Bob buy a .45 and strap it to his waist after have a few beers…………well……
As a gun owner with a cc permit holder, I have really tried to find a way to support this bill. I just can’t bring myself to do it.
We live a world where people will attack somebody over ketchup at a drive thru. Do we want to allow open carry for every one?
I hope I’m wrong and things will be fine. It’s working in some other states.
Most people here obviously don’t know the difference between concealed and open carry. I think most people who really want to carry already have their license. There’s not going to be huge numbers of people roaming around with guns.
“… it does help solidify our status as Top 10 destination for gun nuts…”
Given that Oklahoma is the 15th state to pass constitutional carry, I hardly think this puts us into the top 10.
I predict very little to no change with this. The loopholes to get a gun without oversight already made it fairly easy, and with no likelihood of the loopholes closing, any notion of limiting firearms from those who shouldn’t have them is pretty naive to begin with.
I wish we had gone with the requirements for what was required for a security guard in the State of Oklahoma to carry when I was doing that work (late 1990’s, I have no idea what it is today). First you had to pass the unarmed portions (Phase I and Phase II) where you learned stuff like basic first aid, report writing and the like. Then if you wanted Phase IV (Firearm) on your license you first had to pass a psychological evaluation. Didn’t pass, didn’t even go to the class. Passed then you got to go on to a three day class.
During that class you got training on the legal side, when you can use lethal force and such, and then were tested on it. Didn’t pass the test, you didn’t even get to go to the range.
Then you spent sixteen hours out on a range during which you’d fire over five hundred rounds and learn how to properly use your gun (a revolver). At the end you had to pass an accuracy test administered at varying distances from 3 yards to 25 yards and you had to do it from drawing from your holster and against a clock at each stage. Didn’t pass? Didn’t get your license. Once that was all said and done, you were allowed to carry a revolver on duty.
Wanted to carry a semi-automatic? That was another two day class during which you shot about three hundred rounds, went through another accuracy test similar to the revolver but at ranges from 1 yard to 50 yards, and got additional training in safe handling and use of your weapon. Once that was done, you could now carry a semi-auto on duty.
I remember a lot of people I knew who were guards being irritated when they first passed conceal carry that it didn’t grandfather in those of us who had taken the CLEET security guard tests because the concealed carry classes and requirements were SO much easier.
With everyone armed there is no reason to provide Stitt with security guards or his family. See how safe he feels. give him his own gun to protect hmself. Cops will be on edge for sure. Will be, kill them all let God sort them out, gosh i already feel safer.