Oklahoma governor unexpectedly vetoes pro-gun ‘shall sign’ bill for Class III items

[Jgarrick]

http://www.guns.com/2014/04/30/oklahoma-governor-unexpectedly-vetoes-pro-gun-shall-sign-bill-for-class-iii-items/


Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin Tuesday sank a popular pro-gun bill to designed to speed up the approval process for gun owners to receive suppressors and other NFA-regulated items. The bill would have made it easier for gun owners to legally obtain National Firearms Act-regulated items by making it mandatory for local law enforcement to approve legal paperwork for law-abiding citizens — a key part of the process.

Almost universally accepted by state lawmakers, the measure had passed unanimously in the Senate and cleared the House by a 92 to 1 vote on April 23. “Unfortunately, our progress has stalled here at the Capitol,” Fallin said during a press conference announcing that she had vetoed 15 House bills that, in her opinion, addressed “minor issues.”

The bill that would have mandated ‘shall certify’ for NFA items was among this group of bills. The vetoed bill, HB 2461, would have required the local Chief Law Enforcement Officer, or CLEO, to process all required documents by those intending to purchase NFA-regulated items such as suppressors and short-barreled rifles, within 30-days.

The two-page bill instructed the CLEO verify whether the applicant was prohibited from possessing a firearm by running their information through the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check system. “Any bill that is passed by a legislature with only one dissenting vote is not a ‘minor issue,” said Knox Williams, president and executive director of the American Silencer Association, who had supported HB 2461. “We are currently exploring all options, and will work to ensure the passage of this legislation this session.” The National Rifle Association echoed Knox’s call.

(Excerpt, remainder of articles at link)

With this kind of overwhelming support, I can't see the veto standing. Luckily.

[Logical]

1. Bye bye gjarrick, I for one will not miss you! nt

[IronGate]

2. Gravedancing?

This isn't the place for it.

[Logical]

3. Why? nt

[IronGate]

7. Because it's unseemly

and uncalled for, he's gone, no need to gravedance.

[NYC_SKP]

4. Emboldened by the knowledge that juries act unfairly and with double standards...

The "goodbye" comment would have been saved and removed by moderators as an insult on DU2, and if lodged today against a popular member would be hidden, but for some reason it's A-OK to insult people left and right if those people support the second amendment.

It's not the progressive movement's greatest asset, this sort of hypocrisy, and thankfully it's kind of rare.

[oneshooter]

5. Unfortunately not rare enough. n/t

[NYC_SKP]

6. It would be interesting to see the "number of alerts" against every reply in any given discussion.

Even more interesting to know to what degree there is a concerted effort to get people banned or their replies hidden.

I'm always surprised by hides I get on replies I made weeks ago, and there's a sort of theme about them.

It's as if someone with a lot of time on their hands.... well...

This may be hidden, so back to work.

[IronGate]

8. It's pretty damn obvious

that an alert storm was conducted against jgarrick, and it worked.
I read those hidden posts and I sure as shit didn't see anything hideworthy in them.

[Logical]

10. He was mostly just trying to create fights and disrupt. It was obvious to most. nt

[IronGate]

11. That's strictly your opinion.

[Logical]

13. LOL, well the administrators opinion also. So at least two of us! :-)

[Logical]

9. Really? You think the 2nd had anything to do with this? I am a find with guns and have no issue....

with CC. Not a fan of the NRA or Open Carry.

But some posters are trolls. They deserve to be sent away. It happens many times a day in case you do not pay attention.

Your claim is more people posting on this forum get banned than the other forums?

[NYC_SKP]

12. Oh, I have no idea about DU versus other forums. I'm an observer.

Many posters are trolls, and many are trolls who pretend to support so-called "progressive" values.

Many new posters are accused, it's part of the jumping-in DU process, it's like a gang, it's OK.

All that notwithstanding, I maintain that juries are uneven, and that people on both sides of many issues, gun control being one of them, try to play the system against the way juries and hosts work.

This is new, it's different from DU2, and I'm observing it and citing my observations.

No proof, of course, but strong vibrations.

In the end, I strive to be a contributing and civil member without giving up my core values, not all of which are harmonious with some of the factions here.

But that's OK-- my friend to enemy ration is easily 50:1, and that's pretty good in any community.

I like you, in fact, for many of the posts you've shared related to non-gun issues.

[Logical]

14. I agree that the old admin system was much more fair.....

Seemed less biased and less emotional.

I have posters that annoy me as I am sure we all do. I admit, on a jury it might impact my vote.

I like the 7 person juries though.

And I agree, you and I are in sync a lot! But I have argued with everyone at some point!

[mog75]

15. I've noticed

It didn't take me long to realize that gun owners are not really welcome here. Not long after joining du I witnessed many of the gun owners on here being labeled as right wing, tea party, NRA members. It has pretty much scared me away from posting. Now I see someone has been banned for his pro 2nd stance. I guess some people just can't believe a gun owner can be a true democrat. I hope president Obama doesn't try to post here, as I'm sure his pro 2nd stance would quickly have him singled out as a right wing tea party, nra troll. Sorry for the rant, it just sucks being a democrat and a gun owner some times. We not only take crap from repubs, but democrats as well. I'm not sure where I belong, but du might not be for me. I guess I should have looked into it a little before I signed up.

[oneshooter]

16. You are mistaken.

All democrats are welcome under the DU tent.










However, if you own firearms then you can not be a true democrat.

According to some here.

[Eleanors38]

17. I also reviewed garrick's posts and saw diddly worth

alerting on.

There is a concerted effort to cleanse DU of pro-2A Democrats, esp. if they are outspoken. The gross abuse of GD's TOS is only part of this. IMO, the Ads' sympathies are completely with the banners, but they don't want to look "un-Democratic" by instituting an outright ban on any suggestion of pro-2A presence, so they allow the smear, animosity, and abuse to continue in a vain attempt to somehow drive out pro-2A Democrats.

It hasn't worked, and it won't work.

The only reasons I haven't been booted, I believe, are because I have enough "ignores" that the dynamic garrick experienced fails to reach critical mass with me , and because I pull enough the banners up short by describing in detail the crappy motives behind their stigma campaign. Enough DUers see this & won't go with the promiscuous alerts any longer.