What's in Your Glovebox?

What’s in your Glovebox?

State Representative David Perryman - June 30, 2019

 "Ladies and gentlemen: the story you are about to read is true. Only the names have been changed to protect the innocent." 

For the better part of thirty years, Jack Webb as Detective Joe Friday in “Dragnet” brought realistic law enforcement first to radio and later to television with each and every episode beginning with a similar trademark statement.

Dragnet trail-blazed this genre and was joined by other similar series such as Broderick Crawford’s “Highway Patrol” and Erik Estrada’s “CHiPs.” Mostly set in California, these shows had one thing in common, every time a vehicle was pulled over, the driver was required to produce vehicle registration papers, commonly called “pink slips.”

The popular slang term became widely known and the phrase “pink slip” also spread through movies like Grease, depicting the illegal street races of the 1950’s in which the winner won the pink slip of the loser’s car, referring to this as “racing for pinks.”

Although California vehicle titles and registration certificates stopped being printed on pink paper in 1988, they are still referred to as pink slips and operators of vehicles are still required to carry them when operating a motor vehicle.

Prior to July 1, 2019, Oklahoma owners of non-commercial vehicles with standard issued tags were not required to carry a registration certificate, however, owner of commercial vehicles and vehicles that display custom or vanity tags have long been required to produce a registration certificate when a traffic contact is made with law enforcement.

Effective July 1, 2019, all Oklahomans operating ANY motor vehicle on any public roadway must EITHER “have in their possession” OR “carry in the vehicle” a registration certificate (NOT a Certificate of Title) and must exhibit it upon demand to any peace officer of the state or employees of the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety.

A number of law enforcement agencies, including a spokesman for the Tulsa Police Department has stated that that the law change does not include a penalty so there will be no citations issued for failing to have a certificate of registration, however, that part of the Bill codified as 47 O.S. Section 1113(D) does clearly state that an officer may seize and hold the vehicle when the operator does not have the registration certificate in the operator’s possession or when the officer determines that the registration certificate has been obtained by misrepresentation or has been altered.  

While I did not support the Bill when it was adopted in 2018, Senate Bill 1339 passed in a bipartisan manner based upon the request of the Oklahoma Tax Commission which claimed that it was needed to facilitate Oklahoma becoming the 43rd state where car tags are retained by the seller of a vehicle and used on the seller’s replacement vehicle.

According to the state officials, many former owners of vehicles have incorrectly received citations or been at risk of receiving citations because the new owner of the vehicle failed to properly and timely register the vehicle. Toll and parking violations and sometimes accidents have been blamed on former owners months after a vehicle was sold because the tag remained with the vehicle and the Oklahoma Tax Commission was never notified of the transfer of the vehicle.

This problem may be solved by this new law. Also, purchasers of replacement vehicles will be allowed to immediately put the old tag on the new vehicle and only be required to pay the difference between the registration fee on the old vehicle and the registration fee on the new vehicle until the anniversary date of the tag’s expiration.

If you are unable to locate your latest registration certificate, replacements may be obtained from the Oklahoma Tax Commission or your local tag office. Thank you for allowing me to serve Oklahoma. For questions or comments call me at 405-557-7401 or email me at


Have Bazooka - Will Travel

Have Bazooka -- Will Travel and the Common Good - March 9, 2014

State Representative David Perryman

For seven seasons from 1957 through 1963, actor Richard Boone played a gentleman gunslinger named Paladin in the CBS television, Have Gun—Will Travel.  The storyline involved Boone’s character, a highly educated and cultured mercenary whose residence was the Hotel Carlton in wild-west era San Francisco.  Paladin’s business card intimated that he had no qualms about using his Colt .45 revolver or his single action Marlin rifle for hire, wherever his career would take him.

While the specifics of Paladin’s occupation is slowly being forgotten, the title of the show, “Have Gun – Will Travel” has impacted pop culture as a phrase for the ages.  Over the past 50 years, the blank in “Have ____, Will Travel” has been filled by hundreds of different words playfully connoting an equal number of reasons why one’s services may be needed anywhere, anytime.

This theme, coupled with a common tendency to engage in “overkill” or use of excessive force or action to achieve a goal, naturally results in awkward phrasing during the legislative process.  For instance, when an existing law, or even the absence of a law, raises the ire of a constituent, sometimes legislators are called to address a concern.  A legislator will often respond by drafting a bill to create or amend a statute to correct the constituent’s perceived problem.

Thorough analysis is time consuming and frequently the language chosen by a legislator is not properly “vetted” and is introduced without the legislator being aware of unintended consequences.  I sometimes refer to this process using a bazooka to kill a gnat.  Others speak of this phenomenon as “Cracking pecans with a sledgehammer.” Most cultures and languages have similar idioms.  In China, the literal translation is “killing a chicken with a knife intended for a cow” and the Russian equivalent is “Shooting sparrows with cannon.”

You get the picture. Thus, when the phrase “Have Bazooka – Will Travel” is applied to the legislative process, we all need to speak up about the impact of what could become a bad law.  Such is the case with House Bill 2620.  It contains a total prohibition on the ability of a city or a county to require real property to be registered.  In all fairness, there has been an attempt by several cities and towns, particularly in Florida to impose onerous annual registration fees on real property that is vacant or that appears to be vacant, without regard to how well it is maintained.

Unfortunately, Oklahoma’s HB 2620 is a classic example of trying to perform eye surgery with a hacksaw.  The bill not only totally prohibits registration anywhere in the state, but also invalidates statewide all registration requirements that are already on the books.  For instance, many cities and counties require storm shelters and safe rooms to be registered so that after a tornado, emergency workers and police officers will know where to check to make certain that residents are not trapped in shelters by fallen trees or storm debris.  HB 2620 voids that registration.

Many cities require that owners of commercial buildings register their buildings and provide a floor plan with the locations where people may be working or, in the interest of firefighter safety, where chemicals or materials of an explosive or noxious nature might be stored.  HB 2620 voids that registration.

Many cities require that when a loan on a property goes into default, the mortgage company registers the name, address and phone number of the contact person with the mortgage company who is in charge of a property, so that if storm damage, vandalism, or weeds and trash accumulate, contact may be made quickly to alleviate the problem and prevent neighbors from having their property values damaged.  HB 2620 voids that registration.

For these reasons, I voted against the bill when it was in my committee and I voted against the bill when it was heard on the house floor. It is absolutely true that government should not be allowed to charge fees on well-maintained properties and should not harm or hinder private property rights without a clearly justified public safety purpose.  In short, there should be no imposition on property owners who are maintaining their property and no fee in that situation should be warranted.

Local control is always best.  Each city and town best knows and understands the problems that it is required to deal with.  Unfortunately, HB 2620 is the classic example of “Have Bazooka – Will Travel.”  It is ironic as stated on the March 5, 2014, editorial page of the Daily Oklahoman that, “The party that touts the merits and importance of local control is thus pushing to tell municipalities how to conduct their affairs.”

Hopefully, through the Senate process, the bill will be amended to address these serious concerns.  With a little tweaking it could be a good law rather than the knee jerk reaction that it currently represents. Thank you for allowing me to serve as a State Representative.  If there is anything that I can do to assist you, call me at 405-557-7401 or email me at I look forward to hearing from you soon.