Sb-656

HYRYSC · Jul 9, 2014

I am as eager for this to pass as the next guy, but deep down inside, I wonder if this is a good thing.

Currently in many municipalities, you can open carry with no permit whatsoever. Now we are basically taking that away. Now I do see that we are removing the individual cities from being able to deny that right, but I am not sure if this is a step forward or a step back.

We are turning a right into a privilege that costs money.

If this does pass (like I think that it will) I feel that the next step that we need to push for is constitutional carry...the way that our founding fathers intended.

kcgunfan · Jul 9, 2014

Not this canard again. Any place you can OC without a CCW permit on August 27th, you will be able to carry on August 28th. That is isn't changing. What is changing is that, if you have a CCW permit, you will be able to carry in some places on August 28th that you could not on August 28th.

LMTD thinks that this might cause political subdivisions to enact anti-OC ordinances, I don't see it happening. Both of our arguments have enough fairy dust that neither is particularly convincing.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

HYRYSC · Jul 9, 2014

kcgunfan said:
Not this canard again. Any place you can OC without a CCW permit on August 27th, you will be able to carry on August 28th. That is isn't changing. What is changing is that, if you have a CCW permit, you will be able to carry in some places on August 28th that you could not on August 28th.

LMTD thinks that this might cause political subdivisions to enact anti-OC ordinances, I don't see it happening. Both of our arguments have enough fairy dust that neither is particularly convincing.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

According to the way SB656 is worded (excerpt below), if you are open carrying you will need to present your CCW upon demand from a LEO. It does not state only if the municipality has an ordinance against OC. Explain how is this not a change?

CCS/HCS/SB 656 - This act modifies provisions relating to firearms.

OPEN CARRY ORDINANCES - 21.750

This act provides that the open carrying of a firearm may not be prohibited by a political subdivision for any person with a valid concealed carry endorsement or permit in his or her possession who presents such endorsement or permit upon the demand of a law enforcement officer.

kcgunfan · Jul 9, 2014

The reading is tortured at best. But that is the bill summary, not the actual statute.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

kcgunfan · Jul 9, 2014

Looks like we're past today's penmanship...

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

BB62 · Jul 9, 2014

I have family in Missouri. Would someone please summarize what the bill in question, if signed, would do?

Thank you.

HYRYSC · Jul 9, 2014

kcgunfan said:
The reading is tortured at best. But that is the bill summary, not the actual statute.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Well I might be a but gun-shy (no pun intended) when it come to new gun laws because while some always seem to promise, most fail to deliver. If this does truly increase our freedom without putting another tax, exclusion, provision, etc on our already narrowing freedom, it will certainly be welcome by me.

HYRYSC · Jul 9, 2014

BB62 said:
I have family in Missouri. Would someone please summarize what the bill in question, if signed, would do?

Thank you.

http://www.senate.mo.gov/14info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=28098814

kcgunfan · Jul 9, 2014

Look 4 posts up. There is a little more to it than that, but that's the past you are interested in. Keep in mind that you are not protected by the CCW statutes when open carrying.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

OC for ME · Jul 9, 2014

(2) In any jurisdiction in which the open carrying of firearms is prohibited by ordinance, the open carrying of firearms shall not be prohibited in accordance with the following:
(a) Any person with a valid concealed carry endorsement or permit who is open carrying a firearm shall be required to have a valid concealed carry endorsement or permit from this state, or a permit from another state that is recognized by this state, in his or her possession at all times;
(b) Any person open carrying a firearm in such jurisdiction shall display his or her concealed carry endorsement or permit upon demand of a law enforcement officer;
(c) In the absence of any reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity, no person carrying a concealed or unconcealed firearm shall be disarmed or physically restrained by a law enforcement officer unless under arrest; and
(d) Any person who violates this subdivision shall be subject to the penalty provided in section 571.121.

See, simplicity itself. Those places that do not ban OC are unlikely to ban it now. I do not personally know anyone who OCs, on a regular basis, in my area that does not have a endorsement. And, they then only OC to the range, or when going hunting and other such infrequent activities. Most folks, even with constitutional carry are gunna OC. The CC Industrial Complex will still have customers due to the fact that constitutional carry is not in every state.

BB62 · Jul 9, 2014

kcgunfan said:
Look 4 posts up. There is a little more to it than that, but that's the past you are interested in. Keep in mind that you are not protected by the CCW statutes when open carrying.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Thanks - I missed that post.

What do you mean by "you are not protected by the CCW statutes when open carrying"?

kcgunfan · Jul 9, 2014

Simple that. Missouri has very clever CCW laws protecting you from criminal charges should you carry where the state legislature says you should not. But, those protections only kick in if you have a CCW permit and you are concealed. Look at RsMO 571.107.2

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

OC for ME · Jul 10, 2014

571.107 mean you cannot sneak a gat into any of those places. OC is different...no?

kcgunfan · Jul 10, 2014

Unfortunately, the protections offered by 571.107.2 require that the gat be concealed. Without the defense provided by that statute, you are illegally using your gat. It's one of two complaints I have with how the CCW laws were written.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

OC for ME · Jul 10, 2014

571.030.1

(8) Carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any church or place where people have assembled for worship, or into any election precinct on any election day, or into any building owned or occupied by any agency of the federal government, state government, or political subdivision thereof; or

(10) Carries a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any school, onto any school bus, or onto the premises of any function or activity sponsored or sanctioned by school officials or the district school board.

Churches and schools can allow you to carry. The only thing left is government buildings. Parking lots are OK as long as you keep the gat locked in the car.

If ya have/get permission from the private property "owner", or don't get asked to leave, you can OC pretty much anywhere.

Now, does this mean that a cop will know this obvious distinction? Who knows.

Oramac · Jul 10, 2014

OC for ME said:
Parking lots are OK as long as you keep the gat locked in the car.

Where is this specifically stated in the law? I've looked for it more than once and never found it.

kcgunfan · Jul 10, 2014

107 has exemptions for parking lots in it now.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Oramac · Jul 10, 2014

kcgunfan said:
107 has exemptions for parking lots in it now.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Where? I swear I've looked for it multiple times. Maybe I'm selectively blind or something.

HYRYSC · Jul 10, 2014

OC for ME said:
See, simplicity itself. Those places that do not ban OC are unlikely to ban it now. I do not personally know anyone who OCs, on a regular basis, in my area that does not have a endorsement. And, they then only OC to the range, or when going hunting and other such infrequent activities. Most folks, even with constitutional carry are gunna OC. The CC Industrial Complex will still have customers due to the fact that constitutional carry is not in every state.

Not really that simple. Our 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads ..."shall not be infringed.", but that doesn't seem to be stopping the re-interpretation of that law.

OC for ME · Jul 10, 2014

571.030.1(8) Carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any church or place where people have assembled for worship, or into any election precinct on any election day, or into any building owned or occupied by any agency of the federal government, state government, or political subdivision thereof; or

When OCing You can be in the parking lot. If you are CCing; 571.107.1 has this provision in many of the "prohibited" places.

(1)...Possession of a firearm in a vehicle on the premises of the office or station shall not be a criminal offense so long as the firearm is not removed from the vehicle or brandished while the vehicle is on the premises;

So, if you are discovered to be out of your vehicle while CCing then you would run afoul of the statute. The plain reading of 571.030.1 (8) above contains no such restriction. Now, will any given cop know this, or care? Who knows. On election day while CCing.

(2) Within twenty-five feet of any polling place on any election day. Possession of a firearm in a vehicle on the premises of the polling place shall not be a criminal offense so long as the firearm is not removed from the vehicle or brandished while the vehicle is on the premises;

OC has no such restriction. OC should be the preferred manner of carry if I were a cop. No ambiguity. Outside, good to go.

Sb-656

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member