City Council Votes to Ban "Open Carry" After Gun Incident

[jpak]

http://maplewood-brentwood.patch.com/articles/city-council-votes-to-ban-open-carry-after-gun-incident

A gun scare earlier this month led the Maplewood City Council to vote to ban carrying unconcealed firearms in public during a meeting on Tuesday night.

On March 12, a man wearing a loaded pistol on his hip walked through Walmart, said Steve Kruse, chief of the Maplewood Police Department. Shoppers alerted Walmart workers, who called 911, Kruse said.

Police escorted the man outside and stripped him of his weapon after he refused to tell them his name, Kruse said. Once police identified who he was, officers found he was wanted for an outstanding traffic warrant and arrested him, he said.

Carrying an unconcealed gun—a practice often referred to as "open carry"—is legal with a permit in Missouri unless its outlawed by local ordinances. City Council voted to pass such an ordinance that would ban open carry, but it will require a final vote during the April 12 meeting.

<more>

open carry - open breach of peace

yup

[right2bfree]

1. Its all the brazen gun onwers that will insure that Obama will sign the new gun laws we need...

how ironic!

[rrneck]

2. What laws are those?

And before you answer, try to remember there are over eighty million gun owners, otherwise know as voters.

[rl6214]

4. Is this the NSFA you've been talking about?

Have you and the president written it yet?

You still haven't told any of us peons what this NFSA is.

[catenary]

7. What "new gun law" will make it impossible for a gangbanger to get one?

We await this revelation with bated breath.

[onehandle]

3. For God's sake, he was just wearing his metal.

You're nothing without iron.

[jpak]

6. pathetic

yup

[TheCowsCameHome]

9. ....or maybe just sportin' wood.

[rl6214]

5. Outstanding warrants, huh?

Pretty serious criminal there.

"City Council voted to pass such an ordinance that would ban open carry, but it will require a final vote during the April 12 meeting"

You left this part out though. Kinda different than the title to your post:


"City Council Votes to Ban "Open Carry" After Gun Incident"

Oversight or intentional lie?

I would say intentional lie.

[PavePusher]

8. The Walmart workers did it wrong.

Walmart's official policy is to abide by the laws of the state the store is in. If O.C. is legal, they should not be calling the police unless there is some suspicious/alarming action aside from the firearm itself.

A few calls to the local and district managers would likely net this man an apology from the chain at minimum.

Edit: There's some additional info in the comments section. Turnsout the guy was waiting in line at the register and it seems that the police were making up a reason to arrest him. Hmmmm.....

[rl6214]

10. This is my surprised face at this comment:

:o "Edit: There's some additional info in the comments section. Turnsout the guy was waiting in line at the register and it seems that the police were making up a reason to arrest him. Hmmmm....."

Seems the OP left this out, how convenient.

[oneshooter]

11. Jpak is a great believer in the truth!

Half Truth, quarter truth! just made up truths. don't know were they came from truths!

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[right2bfree]

19. What proof do you have that the police even made up anything? He was disturbing the peace. Period.

Not hard to understand at all.

[PavePusher]

22. There is considerable court precedence that says the mere presence of a sidearm....

in a holster, on the belt (or various other modes of carry), i.e. peacefully exercising a Civil Right, does not meet the standard for "disturbing the peace".

Neither does standing in the checkout line at Walmart.

Not hard to understand at all, amIright?

[right2bfree]

30. Nope. Out here you are going to have the cops called in, period. nt

[PavePusher]

32. Where is "out here"? State? n/t

[right2bfree]

40. No, you are mistaken. Here, an owner can put up signage that allows then to keep guns out of the POB

..legally. Should a person come in wearing a gun,they can be arrested by the police.

It may not be the case in lots of the country ,but not everyplace, thankfully.

Keep your guns out of places that dont want your business and we can all be happy, OK?

[rl6214]

41. "Here, an owner can put up signage"

Where is "here"?

[YllwFvr]

24. False, care to try again?

[krispos42]

12. So that's arrestable, criminal breach of peace, in your opinion?

Wow. Gonzo and Yoo would love to have you in the Office of Legal Counsel.

[right2bfree]

18. Thats what would happen in my city and state too. We are not shopping where people carry guns .

youn want to carry a gun, go out in the woods or to a target range.

Otherwise, people are going to call 50 on you.

Whats so hard to understand about that?

[rl6214]

20. Thing is you ARE shopping where people carry guns

if your state issues concealed carry licenses.

Deal with it or stay home.

[krispos42]

21. Why?

The fact that some people treat it as a Big Fucking Deal doesn't make it a big fucking deal. This has been proven time and time again.

Things that got some people outraged, say, 50 years ago is nowadays barely noticed.

Maybe you're over-reacting. Maybe you're wildly extrapolating based on your own fears and prejudices instead of just dealing with the situation as it stands.

[PavePusher]

23. Here in Arizona, the cops will laugh at you......

before they tell you it's perfectly legal.

Unless it's perhaps a recent transferee from California or Illinois or Maryland or Jersey....

[YllwFvr]

25. and if the officers are well informed on the subject

they will behave the same as officers here should. Ask for ID (here no duty to provide ID, they can say no) make sure he didnt threaten anyone, then tell the caller all is well and leave. Of course some LEOs freak out, but thats opinion enforcement, not law enforcment

[right2bfree]

31. Sorry. Out here wearing a sidearm openly _is_ a breach of the peace

...so get used to it. People WILL call the cops on you.

Lots of people dont like gun owners brandishing firearms!

[YllwFvr]

33. you will get the cops called on you out here as well

But they cant do anything about it. Without it leaving the holster it cant be seen as brandishing here, and even if it did it we have no brandishing law. It would be a disorderly conduct. Ill have to dig through some case law after class. It may be commonwealth vs hawkins that said mere possession of a firearm is not indicative of a crime. So merely possessing a weapon doesnt justify anything more than a mere police encounter. This could just be here though Ill have to see.
Ill do some digging, I dont believe it was a US supreme court ruling.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

38. Where is out here?

If open carry is legal, doing so is not a disorderly conduct/breach of the peace violation. There were some chiefs trying to make it that way in their jurisdictions, but they have been well spanked.

I open carry only on my property which a whole bunch of desert wilderness. Not a big deal, everyone here does. When I have had police encounters, I secure the weapon ahead of time. It makes things go more smoothly.

[one-eyed fat man]

26. Breach of Peace aka "contempt of cop".

Some places have settled this question,and NOT to your liking. Absent some aggravating circumstance, simply wearing a sidearm, openly, is not a breach of the peace. With the possible exceptions of Louisville and Lexington, someone peaceably going about their business wearing a gun openly in a holster will not cause of flood of calls to 911 from nervous Nellies. When the question did come up recently at the State Capitol, the Governor saw no reason to restrict "open carry."

Beshear Not Concerned About Capitol Gun Policy

Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear sees no reason to change the current “open carry” policy for handguns at the State Capitol. Beshear says he feels comfortable and safe in the building. But even if he wanted to alter the policy, Beshear says he doesn’t have the authority.

“Gov. Patton did issue an executive order at one point I think banning weapons in the capitol. And that’s what caused the laws to arrive at where they are today and that is, the legislature is in control of that issue, and not the governor,” he said.

The Kentucky Constitution recognizes a right to bear arms as follows:

All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned:

* * *

Seventh: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state, subject to the power of the general assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons.

The General Assembly is only granted the power to limit the carrying of concealed weapons. The Kentucky Court of Appeals had this to say in Holland v. Commonwealth in 1956.

"In our state the legislature is empowered only to deny to citizens the right to carry concealed weapons. The constitutional provision is an affirmation of the faith that all men have the inherent right to arm themselves for the defense of themselves and of the state. The only limitation concerns the mode of carrying such instruments. We observe, via obiter dicta, that although a person is granted the right to carry a weapon openly, a severe penalty is imposed for carrying it concealed. If the gun is worn outside the jacket or shirt in full view, no one may question the wearer’s right so to do; but if it is carried under the jacket or shirt, the violator is subject to imprisonment for not less than two nor more than five years."
emphasis added

[VoteProgressive]

13. I am 100% for CCW, 100% AGAINST "Open Carry". It is just showing off. nt

[rl6214]

14. what about where concealed carry is not an option

If open carry is the only option, then it's not "just showing off".

[VoteProgressive]

15. I agree. Should have clarified. But I wish all states had CC and just banned Open Carry. nt

[PavePusher]

16. I wish all states would just allow books....

and ban TV, radio and the internet.

[VoteProgressive]

17. Give it a rest. nt

[Callisto32]

34. Why should he knock it off?

It is the same attitude.

Why should the thing you don't like be banned, and the thing you think is okay be allowed?

Neither concealed nor open carry harm anyone inherently, thus both should be allowed. People do all kinds of things that I find stupid and needlessly showy, that doesn't mean the action should be banned. I don't have a right to be free of stupidity in public, and neither do you.

[GreenStormCloud]

37. No always showing off. There are some limited circumstances in which I would like to OC.

Specifically on those occasions when I have to use my bank's ATM at night. Then I would like for the gun to be visible. Let a potential robber know that I will be a high risk robbery and he should wait for the next person.

[RSillsbee]

29. I'm not showing off when I Open Carry

I mean unless you know my mind better than I do. I generally OC because I don't care for IWB holsters and I sometime don't car eto wear a cover garment.

I've never been MWAG'd yet and for the most part other people don't even notice.

Not even at Wal Mart

[PavePusher]

35. Is it "just showing off" in Wisconsin, where it's the only legal way to carry?

What if you simply don't want to pay a fee to the government for the "privilage" of exercising a Constitutional Right?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

39. There are limited times and places for it

I do not consider the mall one of them

[aikoaiko]

27. I support those who open carry the same way I support men who hold hands or kiss in public

I doesn't matter to me if it makes people feel uncomfortable or it offends their sensibilities.


I generally don't do either in public, but if it not prohibited or explicitly legal to do so, then to hell with the pearl clutchers.

[backwoodsbob]

28. so basically he was arrested for not breaking any laws

that's how I read it

[lawodevolution]

36. Which means tax payers are about to lose a lot of money