New open carry bill passes Oklahoma Senate

By: Keith Moon Email
By: Keith Moon Email

ARDMORE, OK - One Oklahoma Lawmaker has proposed a new gun bill that has many residents up in arms. An Oklahoma City Senator who fought in the War in Iraq says Americans should be able to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms without any training or certification.

Oklahoma Senate Bill 129 authored by Republican Senator Steve Russell of Oklahoma City would allow folks 18 and over with to openly carry hand guns without any training requirements. Folks we talked to say being able to openly carry a weapon with no training is a bad idea.

"I don't think people should have it out in the open. It would be too easy to use. I'm not anti-gun, a gun activist, I believe in weapons, but only to defend yourself. That law was also made back in the 1800s when we had to bare arms for hunting purposes and protection. It needs to be updated," says Trooper Ken Duncan of the Oklahoma Highway Patrol.

Troopers with the Oklahoma Highway Patrol say the new law differs from the other pending open carry handgun bill, HB 1736, in that there is no training required.

"It's going to open it up to anyone without ant training being able to carry a gun where the first one is still going to require them to go through the concealed carry classes, and the training and get the license to do so," says State Senator Frank Simpson.

The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 36 to 8 and was sent on to the House of Representatives for consideration. Senator Frank Simpson, who voted in favor of the bill, says it still has a long way to go and changes may have to be made before the bill would become law.

"There are elements of the bill as it is currently worded that many of us don't agree with, but our intent was to keep the bill alive so that we would have a process in place to still amend and make changes to the bill when it comes back to the Senate," Simpson said.

If the bill passes and becomes law folks would still not be able to carry weapons into some private businesses, certain public places or onto school campuses. The bill now goes to the House of Representatives, who will consider it before sending back to the Senate.

You must be logged in to post comments.

Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by Sherry Location: Texas on May 16, 2012 at 07:49 PM
    I wish every state would adopt this law. I don't agree with not being trained, and I don't agree with the age part. Everyone who wishes to carry a firearm should know their responsibilities when deciding to use a firearm.
  • by paul Location: grove okla on May 11, 2012 at 07:46 AM
    As a kid I was taught to respect gun,s and to check any gun that I had in my hand tomake sure it was not loaded I don,t know about letting 18 year,s old carry a gun today unless they were in the service to meany are not ready I would say at least 30 years more of a better time most grown men would not want to carry a gun unless they feel in danger I might keep one in the car unloaded with the bullets some were safe from being seen maybe a sign in the window letting the police know before hand you had a gun in the car If you had a loaded in your car the police may take it from you and your sign that was given to you by the law and you would not have one again if you get a dwi there goes your right to carry a gun in this day and age you should not have any problem if you have obey the laws you should have the right to carry a gun if you wanted to like going to a target range or hunting I don,t know anyone who would want to carry a heavy gun around all the tim anyway
  • by dennis edwards Location: sulphur on May 3, 2012 at 11:35 AM
    Just like concealed carry, there was going to be blood in the streets, did that happen, NO! I do think that there needs to be some training/license requirments, some people don't need to be carring a gun, at all! And for the people that say that the criminals will be carring guns, I have news for you the bad guys are going to be carring their guns regardless of the law, and they hope that you will not have any way to protect your self, when they want to assualt you. I am a concealed carrier, but I don't really care about carring open, one way or the other, it would be nice not to have to worry so much about having your gun so concealed, like when I walk in a pair of shorts and tee shirt, it is hard to hide even a small gun. I do agree that people need more than 8 hrs training. when I went through the concealed course, I was amazed at some of the people that were passed as qualified to carry a gun. SGT. USMC
  • by Wayne Location: Pocola on Apr 20, 2012 at 06:57 AM
    I do understand about nowhere in the 2nd Amendment does it state proper training, however go ahead and let young and old untrained handgun owners carry without any training what so ever and it will be a matter of time before it will be once again mandatory for the required training to have a weapons permit. I'm a 21 year retired Army Veteran and have been teaching the Oklahoma CCW for 7 years now and even the required training that's in place now is not enough. I'm sorry, but 8 hrs of training for 1st time gun owners is not enough for them to carry, manipulate and use thier weapon in a deadly force encounter. I just hope that myself or family are not in the vicinity if some of the citizen's today that carry in our state are faced with a deadly force situation. I'm all about the self defense and the right to own and carry firearms, however, one has to be responsible and trained for the safety of everyone. Those that disagree with this will have a different point of view, if you or one of your family members are injured or killed because of the lack of responsibility or training.
  • by H Location: Edmond on Apr 9, 2012 at 07:34 PM
    18 y.o.'s should NOT be allowed to carry. The part of the human brain that tells you to stop and think before doing stupid things is called the pre frontal cortex and is NOT fully developed until our 20's. For the rest of us, we had no issues in Nevada when I lived there.
  • by Ken Location: Tulsa on Mar 18, 2012 at 12:59 PM
    Would I feel uncomfortable if anyone in Oklahoma could carry a gun when ever and where ever they wanted to?.Kind of, but it would not cause me any more harm than believing I would be struck by lightning in the next day or so. I would get used to it. Kind of, like being on the toll roads at 75 mph and glancing at a vehicle that's pulled along side of me while the driver is staring intently at their cell phone screen while texting. Now That's Uncomfortable..By the way I've been licensed to carry concealed for 8 years now and have had no issues. In fact it used to make me uncomfortable seeing a firearm in someone else's possession but not anymore..
  • by john on Mar 15, 2012 at 11:16 PM
    Do you believe that someone serving honorably in the military should be training enough to cary openly?
  • by Bill Location: Oklahoma City on Mar 1, 2012 at 09:24 AM
    I agree with open carry but there should be more tests if they want to carry their weapon openly, there should be a certain holster with a strap on it so people can't take their guns so easy. Officers of the law should be able to ask people openly for their carry license to make sure their not carrying a weapon illegally. Take and pass a psych test. Put a law in there if they are carrying a weapon into a public area of business they must show their license, weather it be open or concealed. If they just want to have it at their home they need to take the self defence class so their can be no excuses of handling their weapon wrong. When they purchse a weapon their name should go in the law enforcement database to inform officers before they enter a house or walk up to a vehicle so they can be fully aware of it.
    • reply
      by bob on Mar 14, 2012 at 08:29 PM in reply to Bill
      "When they purchse a weapon their name should go in the law enforcement database to inform officers before they enter a house or walk up to a vehicle so they can be fully aware of it. " UUH NO, they dont have that info now and i dont think they should. sound like a lib to me.
  • by Davld Location: MUSKOGEE on Feb 7, 2012 at 10:19 PM
  • by dale Location: wagoner on Nov 14, 2011 at 08:33 PM
    when I joined the army many years ago,I raised my right hand and swore to defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.For all of you that talk of proper training,if you want it then get it, but dont force it on me or others.That is what makes you a domestic enemy of the constitution.No where does it say that I have to be properly trained or that I have to pay for my rights, theyve already been paid for with blood and sacrifice,just look at the young men and women coming home in body bags and tell their families that they are not fighting for our rights and freedoms.What would happen if our lawmakers passed a law that made you pay and get a permit and then recieve "proper training" before you could go to church or pray to almighty god? Would you then think that your constitutional rights were up for debate? I think not!
    • reply
      by H on Apr 9, 2012 at 07:31 PM in reply to dale
      Hooah Dale. I couldn't have said it better.
Sherman 4201 Texoma Pkwy (903) 892 -8123 Ardmore 2624 S. Commerce (580) 223-0946
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 118130484 -
Gray Television, Inc.