oklahoma

So far, three bills related to firearms (that I could find, at least), have been slated to be introduced when the session starts up again in February. As the session approaches and wears on, I will try to keep this updated.

HB 2193

HB 2193 by Rep. Jason Murphey doesn't really need a whole lot of discussion. It simply proposes to amend firearm storage laws to include ammunition. This is presumably to prevent employers and other entities from being able to enforce policies that prohibit the storage of ammunition rather than just the storage of a firearm in locked vehicles in parking lots. What good is that gun that you carry without ammunition, after all?

I had the chance to read the opinion last night, so I should be able to offer some takeaways today.

First of all, I wholly agree with the 10th Circuit's opinion that the "Save Our State" Amendment is likely unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause because it only prohibits the use of one form of religious law regardless of whether it is being called upon in civil or criminal court. It enshrines this notion into the Oklahoma Constitution that Islam is somehow an inferior religion which should not be allowed to exist in Oklahoma.

The Oklahoma Attorney General's office argued that the word "cultures" in the amendment should be interpreted as "religions". But as the 10th Circuit noted, making this substitution implies that religious law deemed to be part of Oklahoma's local culture would be acceptable in Oklahoma courts, while the laws of other religions would not.

The 10th Circuit has upheld the injunction against State Question 755. That is the amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution that resulted from politicians pandering to popular xenophobia.

I haven't had the chance to completely read the 37 page opinion from the 10th Circuit yet. But I believe they are right to uphold the injunction, as it is a fundamental violation of liberty to prohibit people from entering into their own agreements solely because of their religious beliefs.

Press release:

OKLAHOMA CITY - To better target individuals involved in methamphetamine production, state Rep. Steve Vaughan plans to file legislation that would further restrict pseudoephedrine sales to suspected meth cooks.

"While we clearly have a problem with meth production in Oklahoma, I do not think it makes sense to require law-abiding citizens to get a prescription for over-the-counter allergy medicine," said Vaughan, R-Ponca City. "However, I do think we can better restrict sales to those actually involved in meth production."

Under current law, outlets selling medicine containing pseudoephedrine are required to report the name, address and amount of product purchased by every individual to the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drug Control through a computerized program.

I like to read legal stuff. It's a great hobby. It makes me an informed citizen that knows my rights and responsibilities. Furthermore, I tend to review both the United States Constitution and the Oklahoma Constitution on a regular basis.

That said, something stands out to me about the legislative process. It appears to me that the state legislature, particularly the state House of Representatives, may be passing legislation in an unconstitutional manner. And it's not a recent phenomenon, either; it seems that this has been going on for decades.

Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater has sent a letter to Oklahoma Commission for Human Services Chairman Richard DeVaughn, DDS, requesting an explanation of cause as to why the Commission's lack of public vote on returning from closed session or to adjourn.

Of note from the letter (my emphasis in bold):

On Monday, August 8th between 6AM and 8AM, I'll be on Todd Brunner's morning show on Newstalk KCLI 1320AM/99.3FM. If you're not in the coverage area, you can listen live on their website.

I'm not quite sure yet what I'll talk about. Suggestions have included federal alpaca funding and the so-called federal budget deal.

Mary Fallin held her "Facebook Townhall" today. One of the questions brought up was that of legalizing Marijuana.

Her response? (At 15:52 into the video)

"I oppose legalizing marijuana in Oklahoma." Fallin went on to make claims that legalizing marijuana would lead Oklahomans to turn "to other substance abuse" and become criminals who steal and drive recklessly and end up in prisons for other crimes.

In other words, she has no clue about the history of marijuana prohibition nor the fact that the crimes that she alleges Oklahomans will turn to are secondary byproducts of a prohibition doctrine.

As you've undoubtedly seen, many state legislatures are considering enacting new laws dubbed "Caylee's Law", including Oklahoma. In fact, some people have begun petitioning for such a knee-jerk reaction that is basically a solution looking for a problem and would probably make children worse off.

Think about it.

In general, these proposals are calling for failure to report a child missing within 24 hours or the death of a child within 1 hour to be penalized as a felony. But why? Is that really going to have any effect at all on someone who does not want to report that their child is dead or missing? If you answered "yes", you really need to get your head checked because a circuit is obviously disconnected up there.

Term-limited Oklahoma Senator Jim Wilson (D-Talequah) has filed a lawsuit claiming that the Oklahoma Senate Redistricting Plan violates Article 5 Section 9A of the Oklahoma Constitution.

...In apportioning the State Senate, consideration shall be given to population, compactness, area, political units, historical precedents, economic and political interests, contiguous territory, and other major factors, to the extent feasible.