Oklahoma Rifle Association sells out open carry


B

Bighouse Doc

New member
More corrupt trash from a phony RKBA organization.

Link Removed

Wanna bet a payoff occurred somewhere in this?

-Doc
 

Sorry

but I have to agree with the club. If you can't allow it on a person by person basis, and you can't, I just don't think a high percentage of 18 yr old kids running around today should have a gun in their hand....much less openly carrying. Yeah, I know there are some that should be allowed. But it'd be too big of a hassle to qualify each one.
Just don't think it'd be a good idea right now.
 
BeauRyker said:
but I have to agree with the club. If you can't allow it on a person by person basis, and you can't, I just don't think a high percentage of 18 yr old kids running around today should have a gun in their hand....much less openly carrying. Yeah, I know there are some that should be allowed. But it'd be too big of a hassle to qualify each one.
Just don't think it'd be a good idea right now.
Click to expand...

Beau: I have to disagree with you and that rifle club. If you restrict 18 yr olds from carrying weapons, you will seriously deplete our military. Those 18 yr old MEN are doing a magnificent job in combat around the world. Why can't they carry at home? I lied about my age and enlisted at 16 and was carrying weapons several years before I was even allowed to buy a beer. In the article, the rifle club mentioned walking around with rifles and shotguns, not pistols. Just how many people are going to walk around with long guns? I think some people have nothing better to do than to complicate matters for others. How would the club like it if restrictions were to be put on their activities just to satisfy those who may think they are too OLD to be handling rifles and shotguns? Sort of tit for tat?:sarcastic:
 
The organization is probably involved in the backroom deal to run on pro-gun issues but make sure nothing passes. I suspect their leadership is composed of Fudds who think only elitists should have the privilege of hunting.

The governor is publicly going to sign open carry. Her deal with the leadership is that it never makes it to her desk.

A relatively clean carry bill passed last year. As planned the gov vetoed it. When it was time to override, most of those that voted for it originally were nowhere to be found insuring the override failed.

Now that they said the would pass open carry, they have total power to do it, yet they are doing everything to sabotage it. Maybe they want to run on this next year.

The Oklahoma legislature is almost as corrupt as the Louisiana legislature. We even had a married repub senator found having sex with the lobbyist to whom he awarded a major contract to sell the juvenile system to a private exploitation company. The crooked AG says he couldn't find anything wrong with this.

I can count the honest legislators on one hand.

Do I need to go on?

-Doc
 
Last edited:
BeauRyker said:
but I have to agree with the club. If you can't allow it on a person by person basis, and you can't, I just don't think a high percentage of 18 yr old kids running around today should have a gun in their hand....much less openly carrying. Yeah, I know there are some that should be allowed. But it'd be too big of a hassle to qualify each one.
Just don't think it'd be a good idea right now.
Click to expand...

The 2nd Amendment must REALLY bother you....
 
NavyLT said:
The 2nd Amendment must REALLY bother you....
Click to expand...

The second amendment presently provides individuals the right to own a firearm of common usage for purposes of self defense in their homes, subject to a state or local licensing scheme.

Tossing the 2nd into a discussion of the appropriateness of open carry for 18-years old is a stink bomb. That is a typical tactic of the anti-gun gangs - trying to muck up the issue so that it can't get discussed intelligently and perhaps resolved in favor of expanding citizens' ability to own and possess firearms.

The anti-gunners want to keep the discussion focused on nonsensical debates about the 2nd amendment so that there won't be a sensible discussion about the issues that presently block citizens from owning or possessing firearms outside of their homes without government interference.
 
BeauRyker said:
but I have to agree with the club. If you can't allow it on a person by person basis, and you can't, I just don't think a high percentage of 18 yr old kids running around today should have a gun in their hand....much less openly carrying. Yeah, I know there are some that should be allowed. But it'd be too big of a hassle to qualify each one.
Just don't think it'd be a good idea right now.
Click to expand...

Now hold on.
An 18 year old can be in the military, trusted with a gun to go fight in a war to preserve YOUR freedom here at home, but that same 18 year old brain turns to mush otherwise?
 
Ruger357SP101 said:
Now hold on.
An 18 year old can be in the military, trusted with a gun to go fight in a war to preserve YOUR freedom here at home, but that same 18 year old brain turns to mush otherwise?
Click to expand...

Well, there is a difference. Military training reduces the trainee to infantile status, then rebuilds the trainee into a focused fighting machine. Along the way the trainee receives a good deal of instruction about how not to shot a fellow trainee.

If 18-year olds in civies went through the same training I'd agree they should have the same access to firearms.
 
nogods said:
Well, there is a difference. Military training reduces the trainee to infantile status, then rebuilds the trainee into a focused fighting machine. Along the way the trainee receives a good deal of instruction about how not to shot a fellow trainee.

If 18-year olds in civies went through the same training I'd agree they should have the same access to firearms.
Click to expand...

That's simply not true. I personally know a guy who is ex army and twice in the last six months, in my presence, I've seen him have negligent discharges. One was a flyer from a 9mm and the other time he almost shot himself in the foot with a .22 semi.

Mandated training means nothing. Training by personal choice means everything.
 
Ultimately, this isn't about lawful, legal adults having firearms. It isn't about idiots who wish to deprive legal adults of firearms.

This is about the corruption of the ruling faction in the Oklahoma legislature, and the corrupt, elitist friends of theirs in the ORA.

I always thought NY and Louisiana were the most corrupt states. Now I am having my doubts.

-Doc

-Doc
 
Last edited:
nogods said:
Well, there is a difference. Military training reduces the trainee to infantile status, then rebuilds the trainee into a focused fighting machine. Along the way the trainee receives a good deal of instruction about how not to shot a fellow trainee.

If 18-year olds in civies went through the same training I'd agree they should have the same access to firearms.
Click to expand...

What army were you in?

That wasn't the US Army I was in!

-Doc
 
BeauRyker said:
but I have to agree with the club. If you can't allow it on a person by person basis, and you can't, I just don't think a high percentage of 18 yr old kids running around today should have a gun in their hand....much less openly carrying. Yeah, I know there are some that should be allowed. But it'd be too big of a hassle to qualify each one.
Just don't think it'd be a good idea right now.
Click to expand...

That's funny. Colorado has been a permitless OC state for since I don't know when. Seems to work just fine.
 
G50AE said:
Then why aren't you called "ArmyLT"?
Click to expand...

I enlisted in the Navy in 1988, went to OCS and was commissioned in the Navy in 2001.

Also, being an O-3 in the Navy, makes me a Captain in the Army, but I can't say I am a Captain, being in the Navy, because then I would be claiming to be an O-6 in the Navy!

Now, since I've been selected to O-4, hopefully to get paid in July, I will be a Lieutenant Commander in the Navy, which eliminates some confusion because I would be a Major in the Army, but we don't have Majors in the Navy, except as the primary focus of our college degrees! :biggrin:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 131 (members: 0, guests: 131)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,544
Messages
611,262
Members
74,964
Latest member
sigsag1

Share this page

Back
Top