Oklahoma HB1059

[nikatkimber]

Oklahoma HB1059

Because I've now spent the time going through it for "another" forum, here is my breakdown of this bill.

There was some concern that this bill makes OC illegal.

My reading is that it does NOT make open carry illegal. Rather, it says that if you carry concealed, it has to be carried concealed. My understanding would be that if you are intending to conceal, but it is obvious you have a gun, then you are outside the law. Concealing with a jacket, then removing at dinner would be changing from concealed to unconcealed.

The idea is that "I'm going to conceal, just not be that concerned with hiding it" won't be allowable. Either conceal it, like you had to before, or open carry it. The difference is that an accidental exposure is no longer a worry.

A. It shall be unlawful for
1. For any person to carry upon or about his or her person, or
in a purse or other container belonging to the person, any pistol,
revolver, shotgun or rifle whether loaded or unloaded or any dagger,
bowie knife, dirk knife, switchblade knife, spring-type knife, sword
cane, knife having a blade which opens automatically by hand
pressure applied to a button, spring, or other device in the handle
of the knife, blackjack, loaded cane, billy, hand chain, metal
knuckles, or any other offensive weapon, whether such weapon be
concealed or unconcealed, except;
2. For any person without a valid handgun license issued
pursuant to the provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act to carry
upon or about his or her person or in a purse or other container
belonging to the person, any pistol or revolver; or
3. For any person carrying a handgun with a valid handgun
license issued pursuant to the provision of the Oklahoma Self-
Defense Act to intentionally fail to conceal the handgun within the
meaning of the definition provided for in Section 1290.2 of this
title; provided, however, that accidental exposure of the handgun
shall not constitute an offense under the provisions of this
section.

DEFINITIONS
A. As used in the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act:
1. "Concealed handgun" means a loaded or unloaded pistol
carried hidden from the detection and view of another person either
upon or about the person, in a purse or other container belonging to
the person, or in a vehicle which is operated by the person or in
which the person is riding as a passenger, the presence of which is
not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable
person;
2. “Unconcealed handgun” means a loaded or unloaded pistol
carried upon the person in a belt or shoulder holster that is wholly
or partially visible, or carried upon the person in a scabbard or
case designed for carrying firearms that is wholly or partially
visible; and

Regarding knives. My reading says not much would change regarding knives.

A. It shall be unlawful for
1. For any person to carry upon or about his or her person, or
in a purse or other container belonging to the person, any pistol,
revolver, shotgun or rifle whether loaded or unloaded or any dagger,
bowie knife, dirk knife, switchblade knife, spring-type knife, sword
cane, knife having a blade which opens automatically by hand
pressure applied to a button, spring, or other device in the handle
of the knife, blackjack, loaded cane, billy, hand chain, metal
knuckles, or any other offensive weapon, whether such weapon be
concealed or unconcealed, except;

Bold is my emphasis. The struck out portion is still covered under the bolded section.

 

[nikatkimber]

Regarding where and where not to carry:

UNLAWFUL CARRY IN CERTAIN PLACES
A. It shall be unlawful for any person in possession of a valid
handgun license issued pursuant to the provisions of the Oklahoma
Self-Defense Act to intentionally, knowingly or recklessly carry any
concealed or unconcealed handgun into any of the following places:
1. Any structure, building, or office space which is owned or
leased by a city, town, county, state, or federal governmental
authority for the primary purpose of conducting business with the
public and that provides authorized security personnel and metal
detectors through which members of the public are required to pass
through;
2. Any meeting of any city, town, county, state or federal
officials, school board members, legislative members, or any other
elected or appointed officials;
3. Any prison, jail, detention facility or any facility used to
process, hold, or house arrested persons, prisoners or persons
alleged delinquent or adjudicated delinquent;
4. Any elementary or secondary school;

My understanding here is that the "intentionally, knowingly, recklessly" would cover you if you had accidentally left something in a bag or your car. Be pretty hard to argue if it was on your body.

As a poster above me inferred, the "primary" means that just because a government entity leases/rents/uses a building for a temporary use, does not mean it is barred. ALSO, for any government building to be barred from carry, they must provide armed security and metal detectors. Another change is it removes the "any meeting of government officials" from the barred list.

The following section I'm not sure I like:

UNLAWFUL CARRY IN CERTAIN PLACES
B. For purposes of paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 4 of subsection
A of this section, the prohibited place does not include and
specifically excludes the following property:
4. Any property designated by a city, town, county, or state,
governmental authority as a park, recreational area, or fairgrounds;
provided, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to authorize
any entry by a person in possession of a concealed or unconcealed
handgun into any structure, building, or office space which is
specifically prohibited by the provisions of subsection A of this
section.

It looks to be removing the exclusion of parks/fairgrounds from the barred list. That would mean if they put up metal detectors(meaningless on such a large outside event) and armed security (already done), they could legally restrict carry. I don't like that.




Next change is school property.

POSSESSION OF FIREARM ON SCHOOL PROPERTY
B. “School property” means any publicly or privately owned
property held for purposes of elementary, or secondary or
vocational-technical education, and shall not include property owned
by public school districts or private educational entities where
such property is leased or rented to an individual or corporation
and used for purposes other than educational.

This simply removes vo-tech schools from the barred list. Good.

POSSESSION OF FIREARM ON SCHOOL PROPERTY
C. Firearms and weapons are allowed on school property and
deemed not in violation of subsection A of this section as follows:
1. A gun or knife designed for hunting or fishing purposes kept
in a locked privately owned vehicle and properly displayed or stored
as required by law, or a handgun carried in a vehicle pursuant to a
valid handgun license authorized by the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act,
provided such vehicle containing said gun or knife is driven onto
school property only to transport a student to and from school and
such vehicle does not remain unattended on school property;
2. A handgun carried in a vehicle by a person in possession of
a valid handgun license issued pursuant to the Oklahoma Self-Defense
Act on any property set aside for the use or parking of any vehicle,
whether attended or unattended, provided the handgun is hidden from
plain view and locked in a vehicle or locked in a compartment that
is securely attached to the vehicle;

I wish they had just changed the whole section to allow any gun/knife to be stored in a vehicle on school grounds provided it was secured. However, it is still a positive step here: they allow for a CHL holder to carry onto school grounds provided it is secured.

 

[nikatkimber]

Next change is punishment for possession on school property.

POSSESSION OF FIREARM ON SCHOOL PROPERTY
D. Any person violating who has not been issued a handgun
license pursuant to the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act and who violates
the provisions of this section shall, upon conviction, be guilty of
a felony punishable by a fine not to exceed Five Thousand Dollars
($5,000.00), and imprisonment in the custody of the Department of
Corrections for not more than two (2) years.
E. Any person convicted of violating the provisions of this
section after having been issued a handgun license pursuant to the
provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act shall have the license
permanently revoked and shall be liable for an administrative fine
of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) upon a hearing and determination by
the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation that the person is in
violation of the provisions of this section, upon conviction, be
guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed Two
Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00).

Previously, there was no misdemeanor, but you permanently lost your carry permit. Here, you get a misdemeanor, but don't necessarily lose your permit permanently. Oh, the fine is $250 instead of $100 as before.


Changes in what will preclude you from getting the CHL

OTHER PRECLUSIONS
A.
10. An arrest for an alleged commission of, a misdemeanor
offense or a misdemeanor charge pending for, or the in this state or
another state. The preclusive period shall be until the final
determination of the matter; or

As changed:
"10. An arrest for an alleged commission of a misdemeanor
offense or a misdemeanor charge pending in this state or
another state. The preclusive period shall be until the final
determination of the matter; or"

So if you have an arrest or charge pending for a misdemeanor you are precluded until it is resolved? That doesn't make sense. If you get convicted, you're still fine? Just can't have a charge or arrest?




Businesses

BUSINESS OWNER’S RIGHTS
A. Except as provided in subsection B of this section, nothing
contained in any provision of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act, Section
1290.1 et seq. of this title, shall be construed to limit, restrict
or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of any person,
property owner, tenant, employer, or business entity to control the
possession of weapons on any property owned or controlled by the
person or business entity.
B. A property owner, tenant, employer, or business entity may
prohibit any person from carrying a concealed or unconcealed firearm
on the property. If the building or property is open to the public,
the property owner, tenant, employer, or business entity shall post
signs on or about the property stating such prohibition.
C. 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 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 One Hundred Dollars
($100.00).
D. No person, property owner, tenant, employer, or business
entity shall be permitted to establish any policy or rule that has
the effect of prohibiting any person, except a convicted felon, from
transporting and storing firearms in a locked vehicle on any
property set aside for any vehicle.

Subsection B says if it is open to the public, the business must be posted. IE, verbal warning DOES NOT count.
Subsection C says explicitly that it is not a crime, and that the fine is at most $100.

All good in my opinion.

 

[nikatkimber]

My opinion as a whole is that this is good, other than the removal of parks/fairgrounds from the legally allowed list, and the nosensical blanket misdemeanor charge/arrest statement (but not conviction).

 

[StealthESW]

My opinion as a whole is that this is good, other than the removal of parks/fairgrounds from the legally allowed list, and the nosensical blanket misdemeanor charge/arrest statement (but not conviction).

Wouldn't conviction be redundent? I mean if you are convicted, you have already been arrested and charged.

 

[nikatkimber]

As changed:
"10. An arrest for an alleged commission of a misdemeanor
offense or a misdemeanor charge pending in this state or
another state. The preclusive period shall be until the final
determination of the matter; or"


It sounds to me like once it has a final determination, you are no longer precluded. IE, convicted or aquitted, you still are no longer precluded.

 

[StealthESW]

I see, and that is confusing. But is convictions covered elsewhere in a different law that would cover that or does it only pertain to felony convictions at that point?

 

[nikatkimber]

Hmm... Looks like it might be. I was even looking for it earlier.

Hit my link in the first post, it's direct to the .pdf text of the bill. Might even consider saving it.

 

[StealthESW]

6. Two or more convictions of public intoxication pursuant to Section 8 of Title 37 of the Oklahoma Statutes, or a similar law of another state. The preclusive period shall be three (3) years from the date of the completion of the last sentence;
7. Two or more misdemeanor convictions relating to intoxication or driving under the influence of an intoxicating substance or alcohol. The preclusive period shall be three (3) years from the date of the completion of the last sentence or shall require a certified statement from a licensed physician stating that the person is not in need of substance abuse treatment;

Sounds like if you are not convicted you are fine. If you are then the preclusive period will depend on the conviction type. So, looks like the precludement period depends on the type of conviction i.e. 2 or more convictions of public intoxication or driving under the influence is 3 years.

However, it looks like they are all 3 years for a misdemeanor or a felony.

 

[nikatkimber]

Alright, so that puts that concern to rest.

 

[poopgiggle]

I think "intentionally fail to conceal" might mean exposing a concealed gun during an argument or something, but wasn't that illegal already?

 

[StealthESW]

I do believe brandishing is illegal.

Or maybe, taking off a jacket and...yep there it is. Oops.

 

[Iggie]

I dont know about some of these changes... mind you I have only had time to look over what you have posted. my opinion on the knife thing is that it would allow spring assist knives "knife having a blade which opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button, spring, or other device in the handle of the knife" this doesn't reference pushing on the blade of the knife as you must with sprig assist.

I dont like the idea of loosing parks/recreational areas such as the lake, or local park.

some of the other changes seem borderline to me, not sure we would actually see a benefit from them.

 

[dennishoddy]

I asked a Master Sargent on the OKC Pd about the knife law currently on the books on Ok. He said the spring assisted openers currently in use are legal. It's the old switchblades that the current law made illegal back in the day. The switchblades blade came out of the handle in a linear movement, not opening like a conventional folding knife.

I think "intentionally fail to conceal" might mean exposing a concealed gun during an argument or something, but wasn't that illegal already?

Yes.

 

[nikatkimber]

I sent the author, Rep Mark Mccullough, an email about this yesterday at 4pm.

I received a response at 6pm.

Here is what I sent him:

"
Hello Mr Mccullough,

I have had the chance to read through this proposed legislation. I have a couple concerns with it. Please review my comments.

In the current bill it reads:
Section 1272. A. 3.
3. For any person carrying a handgun with a valid handgun
license issued pursuant to the provision of the Oklahoma Self-
Defense Act to intentionally fail to conceal the handgun within the
meaning of the definition provided for in Section 1290.2 of this
title; provided, however, that accidental exposure of the handgun
shall not constitute an offense under the provisions of this
section

This, most likely unintentionally, appears to conflict with the rest of the bill in that it refers to concealed as the only valid method of carry. Secondly, it uses the word “the” prior to handgun. There is currently no restriction within the SDA on how many firearms a person may carry legally. This usage of the word “the” would implicitly add that restriction. My suggestion for wording is as follows:

Add the BOLD ITALIC and remove the small red parts.

3. For any person carrying a handgun with a valid handgun
license issued pursuant to the provision of the Oklahoma Self-
Defense Act to intentionally fail to CARRY conceal the handgun within the
meaning of the definition provided for in Section 1290.2 of this
title; provided, however, that accidental exposure of the handgun
shall not constitute an offense under the provisions of this
section.

For reference, Section 1290.2 as proposed in this bill, which I nearly agree with.

A. As used in the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act:
1. "Concealed handgun" means a loaded or unloaded pistol
carried hidden from the detection and view of another person either
upon or about the person, in a purse or other container belonging to
the person, or in a vehicle which is operated by the person or in
which the person is riding as a passenger, the presence of which is
not openly discernible to the ordinary observation of a reasonable
person;
2. “Unconcealed handgun” means a loaded or unloaded pistol
carried upon the person in a belt or shoulder holster that is wholly
or partially visible, or carried upon the person in a scabbard or
case designed for carrying firearms that is wholly or partially
visible;

My concern with this language would be the ambiguity of whether or not said concealed pistol is required to be immediately on or about that person’s body.

The following section that is removed in this amendment I would not like to see removed.

Section 1277.
UNLAWFUL CARRY IN CERTAIN PLACES
B. For purposes of paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 4 of subsection
A of this section, the prohibited place does not include and
specifically excludes the following property:
4. Any property designated by a city, town, county, or state,
governmental authority as a park, recreational area, or fairgrounds;
provided, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to authorize
any entry by a person in possession of a concealed or unconcealed
handgun into any structure, building, or office space which is
specifically prohibited by the provisions of subsection A of this
section.

I believe I correctly understand this language to mean to restrict carry at any such “park, recreational area, or fairgrounds;” the governing body would be required to provide armed security and metal detectors. However, at such large, most likely outdoor, events, both requirements would still be nearly meaningless. Especially metal detectors. It is too easy to get into a fair or park without going through a prescribed entrance. Especially if ones’ intentions were not legal.

One last comment.

In Section 1290.11
OTHER PRECLUSIONS
A.
10. An arrest for an alleged commission of, a misdemeanor
offense or a misdemeanor charge pending for, or the in this state or
another state. The preclusive period shall be until the final
determination of the matter;

This seems nonsensical to me. Please inform me if I am understanding this wrong, but it sound to me that if one has an arrest for, or charge pending for, a misdemeanor, one is precluded from CHL. That alone I don’t have too much problem with; HOWEVER, it sounds as if on final determination â€" regardless of what determination â€" one is no longer precluded. That doesn’t make sense to me. If one is arrested or charged with a misdemeanor that would not preclude one if convicted of, then that arrest or charge should not preclude one either.

The rest of the changes I appreciate, and agree with. Thank you for your time!

Sincerely,
Brent
"

Here was his response:

"
Brent,
Yes. All the "accidental exposure" language is left over from the original version, so it now appears to be obsolete. It was intended as a fix for our harsh "patterning" language. The bill is also meant to expand carry rights to non-secured government buildings and fix the school parking lot felony rule. I'll work on the language in a committee substitute if we need to get the language tighter. This bill didn't get a hearing last year b/c Leadership only wanted one big gun bill, and that was open carry. Spread the word. Thanks.
Mark McCullough
"

It sounds to me like he is on our side for sure, and willing to work on the language. FYI, he is not my representative. Email him with your thoughts on it.

I've thought it would be good to organize a meeting with him - and any other representatives who would like to join - to discuss this and any other firearms bills this year. Set up a plan of action and lines of communication.

 

[nikatkimber]

I invited him to join in the discussion here. If he does not, I will still keep updating this thread with any communication with him.

 

[nikatkimber]

For what it's worth, I again received a swift response.

"
Brent,
I am swamped right now. Filing bills, clients. You have my permission to reproduce my comments. Thanks.
Mark McCullough
"