The One-Way Street Of Gun Laws In America

Have you ever noticed how gun laws are increasingly going in one direction? Whether its “stand your ground” laws or a proposed “open carry” law in Oklahoma, it seems the only gun laws proposed are ones that make it easier to buy and use a firearm. When will humans evolve beyond the need for such primitive and violent symbols of strength? Republicans, conservatives and gun owners are becoming increasingly paranoid about a world that they feel is more dangerous than ever. Nevermind crime statistics that say otherwise. They want guns and they want them now. But that’s not enough, now they want to openly display how much heat they are packing. A proposed law in Oklahoma would allow residents of that state to flaunt their weaponry when out in public. Police are opposed to this measure because they believe it will make their job more difficult.

ThinkProgress – Oklahoma State Senator Justifies Need For ‘Open Carry’ Gun Law Due To Threat From Wild Turkeys

Oklahoma law currently requires that people must generally conceal their handguns. In 2010, then-Gov. Brad Henry (D) vetoed an open carry bill because state police expressed concern that it would make it hard for them “to distinguish criminals from law-abiding citizens.” Keith Barenberg, the president of the Oklahoma State Troopers Association, maintains his concern: “Law-enforcement officers will be that much more jumpy and nervous if they see a gun.” And such confrontations could lead to loss of innocent life. As Norman McNickle, president of the Oklahoma Association of Police Chiefs, put it: “How does the first arriving officers know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are? It makes their job exponentially harder.”

Proponents of the “open carry” legislation, like Tim Gillespie, director of the Oklahoma 2nd Amendment Association, claim the measure is necessary because “we live in a dangerous world.”

I’m not sure card-carrying NRA members give a shit what the police think or what anyone else thinks. They want their guns and their gun rights (as defined by them) and to hell with the police and public safety.


photo by Greta Ceresini

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditPin on PinterestShare on TumblrDigg thisShare on StumbleUponShare on LinkedInEmail this to someone


#2nd amendment#conceiled carry#gun laws#gun rights#guns#nra#Oklahoma#open carry#police#second amendment

  • Craftycri


    The State Police, according to your article, states: “How
    does the first arriving officers know who the good guys are and who the bad
    guys are? It makes their job exponentially harder.”


    I completely agree, disarming law abiding citizens (the only
    people who actually comply with anti-gun laws –by definition) actually will
    make the Police’s job easier to identify a law abiding citizen from the
    criminal, they are the one’s raped, beaten, robbed, and in many cases dead while
    the criminal is the one notably absent from the crime scene.


    What a fine testimony of compassion and dedication, the Police
    demanding the good folks of Oklahoma
    to suffer for their convenience and, David, shame on you for agreeing with them.

    • Guns are violent relics of less evolved times.

      • Craftycri

         Tell you what, you recite that to your home-invader or teach it to a loved one to enlighten their rapist or mugger. Just think, you can even explain to him how we as a society have evolved from all forms and tools of violence and how we should all live in peace and love. Then reach out to him, embrace him and tell him how his actions are society’s fault, how we all have let him down, how that gun in his hand is just a relic of less evolved times, how he should lay it aside as a gesture of good will; turn in his gun for a “coexist” bumper sticker…


        ‘Me an mine’ will follow Col. Samuel Colt’s advice as inscribed on the Colt Equalizer “Be not afraid of any man no matter what his size, just call on me in time of need and I will equalize!” I’m guessing if “taking a knife to a gun fight” is ill advised, taking a slogan is even worse… just sayin’ 

        • No, you are VERY afraid of others. If you weren’t, you wouldn’t need a gun.

          • Craftycri


            David wrote: “No, you are VERY afraid of others. If you weren’t, you wouldn’t need a gun.”


            David, your argument re gun control was based in fear of your fellow man, expecting them to “flaunt their weaponry when out in public”, you
            fear the good citizens of Oklahoma
            “don’t give a shit” about anyone else’s safety. You fear them so much you want
            disarm them completely under the guise of making the police’s job easier,
            because, in your mind, an armed citizen is no different than a criminal and
            therefore your view them as a threat to your safety.


            My argument was based in a trust of my fellow man, of the
            good people of Oklahoma,
            the VAST majority of our population, to protect themselves and others from
            those who would do them harm, and in so doing, protect us all.


            Clearly your argument was based upon a fear of your fellow
            man, and in typical liberal fashion, you project this fear upon everyone and


            Nevertheless, David, it is clear for anyone to see that I trust my fellow citizen and you do not, that my distrust and fear is of
            Government, your passion and love.

          • No, my argument is not based in fear. My argument is based on a belief that we only create a better future for the human race by evolving beyond the need to use violent relics of the past.

            I’m not projecting anything. If I had an overwhelming fear of others, I guess I would be packing. But I’m not.

          • Craftycri

             I see, so despite your statements to the contrary, you actually trust your fellow citizens to pack heat, you just think its pase’, kind of old fashioned, like poodle skirts and saddle shoew?

            Well, I’m cool with that.

          • I’m not sure I would frame it that way. I don’t believe firearms serve the purpose that gun owners think they serve. I think they cause more harm than good. I think people believe if they have a firearm they will be able to protect themselvels, but reality is much more complicated and nuanced. You can’t plan for every scenario, and that’s a problem when you are talking about a violent (and potentially final) solution to a conflict when you use a firearm.

            Take the Tucson shooting of Representative Giffords. There were at least 2 or 3 people that had guns on them (later interviewed) and they stated that they simply had no time to react. Therefore, packing heat did them no good. And in fact, if they had time to react and one of them fired in return, it’s possible one of the other persons with a gun on them could have mistakenly shot the wrong person. My point is, guns are a wild west way of solving problems. Most people will never encounter a situation where they would need to use a gun (if they had it) so to me they are a violent relic of the past that serves no purpose in a modern and civilied society. You can say that is a naive approach to the world, but I say we will never improve the world if we continue to believe in outmoded solutions.