[dp1911]

New bill would allow Oklahoman's to legally point their ccw at a perp, without firing, to deter a crime. It's looking as though it'll pass..., but you never know.

'Point, Don't Shoot' Law Close To Being On The Books In OK - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

Taken from the article:
“Why not allow a person to use his gun to help stop a crime rather than killing somebody?” Rep. Bobby Cleveland (R-Slaughterville) asked over the phone on Friday. “That's what the bill is all about.”

Also:
“We’re neutral. We haven't really weighed in at all,” Mark Nelson from the State Fraternal Order of Police said.

Instead, Nelson said they trust Oklahomans and their lawmakers to make good choices.

“The citizens of the state have shown great, for the most part, decision making as it relates to those types of issues,” he said. “So, we're confident that our legislature in representing their constituents are passing laws that they deem necessary.”

A different article states the House has passed this bill and on it's way back to the Senate, who overwhelmingly approves. Then it's off to the Governer's desk for the final signature. Her stance on the bill is unclear.


Thoughts?

 

[maxwell97]

I'd like to know what's covered by the term "forcible felony."

 

[patkelly4370]

I am not a cop.
My firearm is for defending my life.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[mcp1810]

We have had that for a while in Texas. Nice to have options.

 

[Doghandler]

In other breaking news, Oklahomans prefer loud, expensive and finely tuned pianos . . .

as opposed to to that crap heap you grew up with . . .

 

[shockwave]

Here in Florida, the law is that if you draw a firearm and point it at somebody with the intention of directing them to do something, you have committed a brandishment. Automatic 2-year jail term. If it leaves your holster, you need a good reason. This is probably a better law than the one that allows you to point the barrel of your gun at people and holler at them.

 

[1911srule]

I am tired of the government trying to micro manage every aspect of our lives. Those citizens need to identify who submits these BS filled bills and VOTE them out! Gather on their doorstep with pitchforks in hand!

 

[Doogie]

If this passes you will see people who shoot perps prosecuted because they didn't just "point" their gun. Why not just require everyone to unload their gun? Then they can point all day.

 

[OldVet]

Here in Florida, the law is that if you draw a firearm and point it at somebody with the intention of directing them to do something, you have committed a brandishment. Automatic 2-year jail term. If it leaves your holster, you need a good reason. This is probably a better law than the one that allows you to point the barrel of your gun at people and holler at them.

I'm running up the flag on that one. I'd like to see you quote that statute. There is no FL law stating anything about brandishing."

And what do you mean about "directing them to do something"? Do you mean as in "Hand over your money" or as in directing a robber to put down his gun and lie down? Both are "directing someone to do something, the former being armed robbery and aggravated assault, the latter being self defense.

FL 776.012 and .013 clearly allows the threat of use of deadly force.

As for the OK law, I think it is silly and an ill-conceived concept to think that because one draws a firearm in self defense, one must fire it. I doubt there is any statute stating such. "requiring" one to shoot automatically elevates a threat of doing harm to doing harm. hardly a rational concept.

 

[Mike1956]

I'm running up the flag on that one. I'd like to see you quote that statute. There is no FL law stating anything about brandishing."

And what do you mean about "directing them to do something"? Do you mean as in "Hand over your money" or as in directing a robber to put down his gun and lie down? Both are "directing someone to do something, the former being armed robbery and aggravated assault, the latter being self defense.

FL 776.012 and .013 clearly allows the threat of use of deadly force.

As for the OK law, I think it is silly and an ill-conceived concept to think that because one draws a firearm in self defense, one must fire it. I doubt there is any statute stating such. "requiring" one to shoot automatically elevates a threat of doing harm to doing harm. hardly a rational concept.

The pending Oklahoma legislation reminds me of recently-passed Ohio legislation regarding gun rights, not in what it says, but in that it lends the appearance of legislatures and legislators actually doing something positive on behalf of the gun rights of their constituents, while in reality accomplishing very little, if anything meaningful at all.

 

[OldChap]

I am tired of the government trying to micro manage every aspect of our lives. Those citizens need to identify who submits these BS filled bills and VOTE them out! Gather on their doorstep with pitchforks in hand!

I agree with the basic premise of your statement about government over regulating our lives. I think though that in this politically correct atmosphere what we are seeing is a lot of elected and unelected prosecutors and judges making their own interpretations of law as they go along. In response, legislatures are having to spell things out clearly and simply so that there can be no misunderstanding or misinterpretations.

We have that problem currently here in Texas where the Legislature stated local government buildings, except within narrowly defined limits could not prohibit licensed carry. Predictably, some local "officials" have chosen to "spin" (spin means to lie about true meaning) that law to do as they wish. In response, the Legislature is now spelling things out clearly...with the clear threat that if they violate the intent of the law, they will go to jail.

That may not be the case here, but I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[Dave909]

If my firearm keeps someone from preventing a crime against me, it's because they're bleeding out or they suddenly saw a white light and followed it. I'm not going to request they stop doing something while I point a weapon at them.

 

[dp1911]

We all know situations are different. Tons of what ifs.

I've been in 2 situations, both still very clear, where I did not have to take someone's life but things had quickly escalated. Next move was on them - their fate was their decision. I'll leave it at that.

I believe that, at least a few of these tons of "what ifs", there are situations where it be beneficial for survival (also legal fees, court time, stress, death threats, short jail visit, confiscation of weapon....) to point but not necessarily pull the trigger.

To put it another way, does a cop pull the trigger every time he pulls his weapon? Does pulling his firearm cause a harmful situation to de-escalate safely and everybody goes home (or prison)?

 

[Dave909]

You can't keep using police as examples though, it's a completely different world. We as citizens don't go after bad guys, so them surrendering or fighting police makes no difference to us.

 

[Harryball]

You can't keep using police as examples though, it's a completely different world. We as citizens don't go after bad guys, so them surrendering or fighting police makes no difference to us.

Taken from the article:
“Why not allow a person to use his gun to help stop a crime rather than killing somebody?” Rep. Bobby Cleveland (R-Slaughterville) asked over the phone on Friday. “That's what the bill is all about.”

As you can see the intent of the law is to help stop crime. All this whining about this and that. We are our own worse enemy.

 

[highergr0und]

My fear with a law like this is that it opens the door for prosecutors to try making the case that people who shoot in self defense should have simply presented their weapon....

 

[dp1911]

You can't keep using police as examples though, it's a completely different world. We as citizens don't go after bad guys, so them surrendering or fighting police makes no difference to us.

You're right, we don't typically go after bag guys, but the bad guys can & do come after us.

I fail to see your point

 

[flintlock62]

Not too long ago, I pulled into a convenience store late at night finding "do not cross" ribbons everywhere. I saw a LEO friend and asked what happened. He said a guy with a machete robbed the place. If I had been there during the hold up, drew my gun and told the perp to drop his weapon and get down, I think it would not be wise to shoot him if he obeyed my order.

If the law is so concrete that a shot must be fired or I'm in violation, I guess I'll have to re-evaluate carrying altogether. I'm not going to terminate a life "just because".

 

[Fizban]

I want someone to show me where it has ever said that pointing a gun at a person in the act of committing a forcible felony- is illegal. I just want to read it for myself if this problem even exists otherwise I don't understand what this bill is intended to fix.

 

[Czombie]

I like the law.