PA Bill Number: HB829
Title: In preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Description: An Act amending the act of April 12, 1951 (P.L.90, No.21), known as the Liquor Code, in preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Last Action: Signed in House
Last Action Date: Jul 3, 2024
Social media abuzz over Constitutional carry audits :: 05/22/2019
News headlines and social media have been abuzz lately with videos of people performing First Amendment and Second Amendment audits. Can you tell us a bit more about this trend?
It is generally accepted that the First Amendment allows individuals to record videos of public officials in public places. A prime example of this is videos taken by individuals who have been pulled over by the police as a way to ensure their safety. However, most people would agree this is not an “audit.” Rather, a First Amendment audit is better described as the process of seeking out an interaction with either law enforcement or another group of public officials in an effort to assess the legality of the official's response to recording in public places. Performers of Second Amendment audits take these same principles and add a firearm to the mix. More than half the states in the U.S., including Oklahoma, allow individuals to openly carry certain firearms in public places without a permit. In those states, police officers generally cannot legally stop an individual solely for openly carrying a legal firearm in a public place. Thus, a Second Amendment audit, when done in good faith, is viewed by some as a way to put these legal principles to the test. Auditors frequently upload their auditing videos to YouTube, and those videos have developed into a popular genre of content.
What actions can privately owned businesses take in dealing with auditors, including actions to exclude firearms and video cameras from the premises?
The key thing for business owners to keep in mind when dealing with First or Second Amendment auditors is that auditors' motivations can vary, and an angry altercation posted on YouTube (for whatever reason) may not be good for business. Thus, business owners, above all else, should coach their employees to remain calm and avoid arguing with auditors. As for excluding firearms, Oklahoma is known as an opt-out state, which means private businesses are free to enforce their own policy in regard to carrying firearms on their premises. If a business wishes to exclude firearms, either concealed or unconcealed, the owner of the business must post signs that indicate such a prohibition. As for excluding video recording devices, there isn’t a state or federal law that business owners can invoke against auditors on that basis. However, businesses are generally free (absent discrimination) to deny service to customers, or ask them to leave, for any number of reasons.
What, if any, impact will the new constitutional carry law in Oklahoma have on the climate surrounding the carrying of firearms in establishments?
The most notable part of the new law is that, effective Nov. 1, most ordinary citizens over the age of 21 will be able to carry a certain kind of firearms, concealed or unconcealed, without obtaining a permit first. Policy arguments aside, as a practical matter the law could well increase the number of people carrying guns in public. Business owners should be aware of this when deciding whether to ban firearms on their premises, and in developing methods to enforce those policies in a manner that is legal, effective and designed to avoid unnecessary altercations.
Paula Burkes, Business writer
https://oklahoman.com/article/5631883/social-media-abuzz-over-constitutional-carry-audits
