TexasCHLforum.com

On March 10, the Oklahoma House passed legislation to legalize carrying a handgun openly on one’s hip without a concealed carry permit.
Constitutional open carry now goes to the Senate for deliberation and a vote.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... use-73-15/

Wow! That was quick!

Didn't they just pass OC in the prior legislative session? Well.....it hasn't made its way alllll through the legislature yet. We'll see.

Thanks for posting NotRPB.

Why do they have to poke the bear? Now we will never get constitutional carry in Texas. Our northern neighbor doesn't even have a sign law. Once everyone sees what a storm these Okies raise, our legislators will repeal LTC in Texas and we'll be back to the "traveling" exemption.

joe817 wrote:Wow! That was quick!

We must be on the same wavelength. Those were also the first for words that wen through my brain.

Oklahoma doesn't have Joe Straus to deal with!

It appears like this died in committee last year. Is that correct?

I was researching a bit because the Mrs. is going to visit some friends this weekend and was asking if OK had anything similar to our MPA so she could take the baby Glock loaded and within reach with her in the car. So far, it doesn't look like she can legally.

C-dub wrote:It appears like this died in committee last year. Is that correct?

I was researching a bit because the Mrs. is going to visit some friends this weekend and was asking if OK had anything similar to our MPA so she could take the baby Glock loaded and within reach with her in the car. So far, it doesn't look like she can legally.

Everything I'm seeing indicates that unless your wife has a Texas LTC she cannot carry loaded firearm legally in OK.

ScottDLS wrote: Our northern neighbor doesn't even have a sign law.

Even "gunbuster signs" are enforceable.
OK. Penal Code
TITLE 21 § 1290.22

D. The carrying of a concealed or unconcealed firearm by a person who has been issued a handgun license on
property that has signs prohibiting the carrying of firearms shall not be deemed a criminal act but may
subject the person to being denied entrance onto the property or removed from the property. If the person refuses to
leave the property and a peace officer is summoned, the person may be issued a citation for an amount not to
exceed Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00)

RPBrown wrote:

ScottDLS wrote: Our northern neighbor doesn't even have a sign law.

Even "gunbuster signs" are enforceable.
OK. Penal Code
TITLE 21 § 1290.22

D. The carrying of a concealed or unconcealed firearm by a person who has been issued a handgun license on
property that has signs prohibiting the carrying of firearms shall not be deemed a criminal act but may
subject the person to being denied entrance onto the property or removed from the property. If the person refuses to
leave the property and a peace officer is summoned, the person may be issued a citation for an amount not to
exceed Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00)

That'a good to know, and it requires the property owner to give verbal notice. Only after refusing to leave, and having a LEO, summoned, would the carrier, be subject to criminal penalty.

I knew about the sign thing for myself since I drive through there a few times a year.

Thanks for confirming what I thought I'd read about unlicensed possession while driving.

RPBrown wrote:

ScottDLS wrote: Our northern neighbor doesn't even have a sign law.

Even "gunbuster signs" are enforceable.
OK. Penal Code
TITLE 21 § 1290.22

D. The carrying of a concealed or unconcealed firearm by a person who has been issued a handgun license on
property that has signs prohibiting the carrying of firearms shall not be deemed a criminal act but may
subject the person to being denied entrance onto the property or removed from the property. If the person refuses to
leave the property and a peace officer is summoned, the person may be issued a citation for an amount not to
exceed Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00)

Not enforceable unless asked to leave.

But where are they on their bathroom bill??