Henry Vetoes Open Carry, Obamacare Prohibition
Citing safety concerns expressed by law enforcement, Gov. Brad Henry today vetoed legislation that would have allowed Oklahomans to wear handguns in public view.
Under current state law, properly trained and licensed citizens can carry concealed handguns for their protection, but House Bill 3354, the so-called open carry law, would have expanded that statute to legalize the public display of such weapons.
Proponents of open carry laws claim criminals will be discouraged from committing lawless acts if other citizens are publicly displaying their weapons on the street. Law enforcement officials disagree, however, saying such a scenario makes it more difficult for officers to determine the difference between criminals and law-abiding citizens at a crime scene or domestic disturbance.
“I’m a strong supporter of the right to bear arms and have earned an A rating from the NRA, but this measure does nothing to strengthen 2nd Amendment protections,” said Gov. Henry. “We already allow trained and licensed Oklahomans to protect themselves by carrying concealed handguns, and it doesn’t make anyone safer to wear a holster and display that weapon to the rest of the public. On the contrary, it makes it more difficult and dangerous for law enforcement officers to try to sort out the good guys and bad guys when they arrive at a crime scene.”
In other action, Gov. Henry vetoed legislation that would have prohibited Oklahoma from following the new federal health care law and authorized the Legislature to file a lawsuit over the issue. In his veto message, the governor said HJR 1054 would trigger a futile legal battle and a possible loss of federal health care funding.
Under current state law, properly trained and licensed citizens can carry concealed handguns for their protection, but House Bill 3354, the so-called open carry law, would have expanded that statute to legalize the public display of such weapons.
Proponents of open carry laws claim criminals will be discouraged from committing lawless acts if other citizens are publicly displaying their weapons on the street. Law enforcement officials disagree, however, saying such a scenario makes it more difficult for officers to determine the difference between criminals and law-abiding citizens at a crime scene or domestic disturbance.
“I’m a strong supporter of the right to bear arms and have earned an A rating from the NRA, but this measure does nothing to strengthen 2nd Amendment protections,” said Gov. Henry. “We already allow trained and licensed Oklahomans to protect themselves by carrying concealed handguns, and it doesn’t make anyone safer to wear a holster and display that weapon to the rest of the public. On the contrary, it makes it more difficult and dangerous for law enforcement officers to try to sort out the good guys and bad guys when they arrive at a crime scene.”
In other action, Gov. Henry vetoed legislation that would have prohibited Oklahoma from following the new federal health care law and authorized the Legislature to file a lawsuit over the issue. In his veto message, the governor said HJR 1054 would trigger a futile legal battle and a possible loss of federal health care funding.
Senate President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee and House Sepaker Chris Benge said the effort to pass the resolution will continue.
“By essentially stating that Oklahoma will not abide by new federal health care laws, HJR 1054 invites legal action against the state in a case it cannot win. No state has the authority to selectively ignore federal laws of its choosing, and any attempt to do so will be ruled unconstitutional by the courts, but not before a costly legal battle,” said the governor.
“In the final analysis, HJR 1054 will not affect the administration of federal health care reform or assist supporters or opponents of the federal legislation. It will simply trigger an exercise in legal futility that results in a hefty bill for Oklahoma taxpayers and the potential loss of federal funding for important health care programs currently in place.”
Henry signed the following measures:
-SB 1326, relating to geologic storage of carbon dioxide;
-SB 1332, relating to higher education;
-SB 1700, relating to schools;
-SB 1919, relating to revenue and taxation;
-SB 1998, relating to local transportation funding;
-SB 2128, relating to revenue and taxation;
-SB 2210, relating to intoxicating liquors;
VETO MESSAGE – HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 1054:
This is to advise you that on this date, pursuant to the authority vested in me by Section 11 and 12 of Article VI of the Oklahoma Constitution to approve or object to legislation presented to me, I have VETOED House Joint Resolution 1054. By directing Oklahoma to file one lawsuit and take other actions that will result in another being filed against the state , HJR 1054 exposes Oklahoma taxpayers to costly and unnecessary legal bills at a time when they can least afford them. First, there is no need for Oklahoma to join a costly pending legal battle over federal health care reform when other states have already taken the actions necessary to put the issue before the courts. Oklahoma’s participation will not increase the chances of success and will simply cost the state much-needed resources during a historic budget crisis. Second, by essentially stating that Oklahoma will not abide by new federal health care laws, HJR 1054 invites legal action against the state in a case it cannot win. No state has the authority to selectively ignore federal laws of its choosing, and any attempt to do so will be ruled unconstitutional by the courts, but not before a costly legal battle. Finally, this measure could jeopardize future federal funding for critical health care programs on which many Oklahomans currently rely. In the final analysis, HJR 1054 will not affect the administration of federal health care reform or assist supporters or opponents of the federal legislation. It will simply trigger an exercise in legal futility that results in a hefty bill for Oklahoma taxpayers and the potential loss of federal funding for important health care programs currently in place.
VETO MESSAGE – HOUSE BILL NO. 3354:
This is to advise you that on this date, pursuant to the authority vested in me by Section 11 and 12 of Article VI of the Oklahoma Constitution to approve or object to legislation presented to me, I have VETOED House Bill 3354. As a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment and the holder of an A rating from the National Rifle Association, I have consistently supported and approved legislation that preserves and strengthens an individual’s constitutional right to bear arms. However, House Bill 3354 does nothing to enhance 2nd Amendment protections and could ultimately endanger public citizens and law enforcement officers. State law already authorizes appropriately trained and licensed citizens to carry concealed firearms for their protection and there is no compelling safety reason or 2nd amendment argument to expand the existing statute. On the contrary, law enforcement officials have raised concerns about the unintended consequences of citizens openly brandishing weapons in public places and have said such a law would make their jobs more difficult and dangerous. Instead of making our streets safer, HB 3354 could ultimately make them more hazardous. The legislation could also damage Oklahoma’s image as a safe, friendly state with a great quality of life, making it less attractive to new business and industry and negatively impacting future prosperity.
“By essentially stating that Oklahoma will not abide by new federal health care laws, HJR 1054 invites legal action against the state in a case it cannot win. No state has the authority to selectively ignore federal laws of its choosing, and any attempt to do so will be ruled unconstitutional by the courts, but not before a costly legal battle,” said the governor.
“In the final analysis, HJR 1054 will not affect the administration of federal health care reform or assist supporters or opponents of the federal legislation. It will simply trigger an exercise in legal futility that results in a hefty bill for Oklahoma taxpayers and the potential loss of federal funding for important health care programs currently in place.”
Henry signed the following measures:
-SB 1326, relating to geologic storage of carbon dioxide;
-SB 1332, relating to higher education;
-SB 1700, relating to schools;
-SB 1919, relating to revenue and taxation;
-SB 1998, relating to local transportation funding;
-SB 2128, relating to revenue and taxation;
-SB 2210, relating to intoxicating liquors;
VETO MESSAGE – HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 1054:
This is to advise you that on this date, pursuant to the authority vested in me by Section 11 and 12 of Article VI of the Oklahoma Constitution to approve or object to legislation presented to me, I have VETOED House Joint Resolution 1054. By directing Oklahoma to file one lawsuit and take other actions that will result in another being filed against the state , HJR 1054 exposes Oklahoma taxpayers to costly and unnecessary legal bills at a time when they can least afford them. First, there is no need for Oklahoma to join a costly pending legal battle over federal health care reform when other states have already taken the actions necessary to put the issue before the courts. Oklahoma’s participation will not increase the chances of success and will simply cost the state much-needed resources during a historic budget crisis. Second, by essentially stating that Oklahoma will not abide by new federal health care laws, HJR 1054 invites legal action against the state in a case it cannot win. No state has the authority to selectively ignore federal laws of its choosing, and any attempt to do so will be ruled unconstitutional by the courts, but not before a costly legal battle. Finally, this measure could jeopardize future federal funding for critical health care programs on which many Oklahomans currently rely. In the final analysis, HJR 1054 will not affect the administration of federal health care reform or assist supporters or opponents of the federal legislation. It will simply trigger an exercise in legal futility that results in a hefty bill for Oklahoma taxpayers and the potential loss of federal funding for important health care programs currently in place.
VETO MESSAGE – HOUSE BILL NO. 3354:
This is to advise you that on this date, pursuant to the authority vested in me by Section 11 and 12 of Article VI of the Oklahoma Constitution to approve or object to legislation presented to me, I have VETOED House Bill 3354. As a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment and the holder of an A rating from the National Rifle Association, I have consistently supported and approved legislation that preserves and strengthens an individual’s constitutional right to bear arms. However, House Bill 3354 does nothing to enhance 2nd Amendment protections and could ultimately endanger public citizens and law enforcement officers. State law already authorizes appropriately trained and licensed citizens to carry concealed firearms for their protection and there is no compelling safety reason or 2nd amendment argument to expand the existing statute. On the contrary, law enforcement officials have raised concerns about the unintended consequences of citizens openly brandishing weapons in public places and have said such a law would make their jobs more difficult and dangerous. Instead of making our streets safer, HB 3354 could ultimately make them more hazardous. The legislation could also damage Oklahoma’s image as a safe, friendly state with a great quality of life, making it less attractive to new business and industry and negatively impacting future prosperity.
posted by Mike McCarville @ 4:10 PM
<< Home