TexasCHLforum.com

Browsing today, lookie what I found on CNN.Com, made me smile a little.......


OKLAHOMA CITY, Oklahoma (AP) -- People with specialized firearms training, such as military personnel, would be allowed to carry concealed weapons on Oklahoma's college campuses, under a bill that passed the state's House Thursday.

The measure was approved 65-36, despite opponents who said it made no sense following shootings at schools across the country.

It now heads to the state Senate for a vote.

Introduced by Rep. Jason Murphey, R-Guthrie, the law would authorize active-duty military and National Guard and reserve personnel, honorably discharged veterans and others with firearms training certified by the Council on Law Enforcement Education who hold a state concealed weapons license to carry guns on college and university campuses.

The legislation is more narrow than Murphey's original proposal, which would have allowed anyone at least 21 years old with concealed handgun carrying rights to carry weapons on campus. That version was similar to a Utah law.

"This has to be the craziest thing I have ever seen," said Rep. Ray McCarter, D-Marlow, one of several lawmakers who said the measure is opposed by college administrators.


Supporters argued that the measure would make college campuses safer by putting guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens.

Rep. Colby Schwartz, R-Yukon, said someone with a concealed weapon might be the only person in a classroom who can protect himself and others from an attacking gunman.

"When seconds matter the police are just minutes away," said Rep. Rex Duncan, R-Sand Springs.

House members also approved a measure that lowers the age to 18 from 21 of active-duty military, National Guard and reserve personnel as well as veterans who can be licensed to carry a concealed weapon.

Murphey said his bill was a "commonsense step" to expand Oklahoma's concealed weapons law to combat campus violence.

"The concealed carry law is about 12 years old. It's worked out very well," Murphey said. He said more than 60,000 Oklahomans are licensed to carry concealed weapons, and there has been no widespread gun violence in the state, which opponents had warned of.

Murphey's bill would require people authorized to carry a concealed handgun to provide written notice to the university or college president before bringing a gun on campus. It would not limit a university's ability to restrict concealed weapons from access-controlled areas where people are subject to security checks.

Do you realise how many vets attend college,and how many have actual combat experience,under this bill I would not think a shooter would get off many rounds before he was neutralised.Uner this law even i would be allowed to carry concealed as I am an honoably discharged veteran,and have received training for my chl.I think all 50 states need to take notice of this bill and actually expand it to include all chl holders.Baby steps remember Baby steps

I am encouraged to see this in a (Camel's nose under the tent) sort of way.

Still, the bill went through rather "Neutered".

That's a good start!!!

Now lets keep it going.

Dan

As others have indicated, although this bill isn't perfect, it is a step in the right direction!

That's great! Remember: if you can't get all of what you want, settle for some of what you want. This is the same tactic the anti's have been using: a little bit here, a little bit there.

When the same thing happens on OK college campuses that has happened on their city streets by allowing concealed handguns (namely, nothing), it will be that much easier to spread it across the country.

Does this mean that non-military civilians who have their CHL would have to take an additional course/training/test to qualify to carry onto campuses as well? Either way a step in the right direction.

I know there was a push for something similar in TX immediately after Virginia Tech, but things were still pretty hot here in Iraq and I wasn't really able to follow the progress (or lack thereof) - did we manage to get anything passed, or not?

I'm all for carry rights, everywhere - thanks to the 2nd's "shall not be infringed", and man's God given right (if not duty) to protect himself. I know we've all noticed that the only places killing sprees take place are always gun-free zones, and despite emotional outbursts from enemies of the Constitution that is far from coincidence. When I redeploy to home station, and ETS, the next thing on my list is finishing school. I'll be at Texas State, right along side my youngest sister. Personally, legally armed or not, I'll use everything at my disposal to end an attack should one present itself. Sure would be nice if the option existed to have the right tool for the job. Interestingly enough, weapons of any kind are prohibited on campus - yet there is a Veteran Affairs office. The last time I checked, an infantryman was quite literally a weapon.

Good for OK, hopefully the rest of the country takes notice.

macktruckturner wrote:I know there was a push for something similar in TX immediately after Virginia Tech, but things were still pretty hot here in Iraq and I wasn't really able to follow the progress (or lack thereof) - did we manage to get anything passed, or not?

No. It was too late in the legislative cycle. Gov. Perry was enthusiastic, though.

- Jim

I have a good feeling that Texas will follow with an even better bill that will include current and future CHL holders.

A good step in the right direction. Hope we go a little further in our next legislative session.

If I understand this correctly, every armed forces Veteran is assumed to have more training than a typical CHL holder. This is pretty funny. My ancient historical perspective just doesn't find this true. Most military personnel spend little time learning personal protection skills with a hand gun, Most will never even touch a handgun. Many CHLers will take thier handguns to the range on their own time. The Millitary usually discourages this. Some bases make it difficult for those living in barraks to even own their own guns.

Liberty wrote:If I understand this correctly, every armed forces Veteran is assumed to have more training than a typical CHL holder. This is pretty funny. My ancient historical perspective just doesn't find this true. Most military personnel spend little time learning personal protection skills with a hand gun, Most will never even touch a handgun. Many CHLers will take thier handguns to the range on their own time. The Millitary usually discourages this. Some bases make it difficult for those living in barraks to even own their own guns.

My thoughts exactly. During my 11 years on Active Duty, there was little training on individual weapon use. In Basic and AIT, you get minimal training on safety and marksmanship, but once you could put rounds on target the instructors would move on to those who could not hit the paper. From that point forward, you were basically on your own to improve during practice or qualification sessions. The focus quickly changes to squad/platoon/company tactics and how to employ "firepower" as opposed to individual skills. One thing I did learn in the military is how to live with a firearm. Working, eating, sleeping, showering, etc...with a firearm 24/7 for 6 months or more in a hostile environment teaches lessons that are difficult to learn elsewhere.

As to individual skills, I've learned more in a 2 day defensive handgun course than I ever learned in the military.

Well, the article says veterans and "others with firearms training certified by the Council on Law Enforcement Education" (I guess this would include LEOs) who hold a state concealed weapons license.

Therefore, it's not just a veteran who may have completed basic training years ago, but current license holders who happen to be veterans.

I couldn't find the full text of the bill.

I dislike the idea of special classes of licensees, but this is a start.

- Jim

Unfortunately this leaves one of the most popular victim groups, women, without a gun, depending on the extent of the additional training. Yes I know there are quite a few women vets.