TechnoWeenie
Regular Member
imported post
underthebridge wrote:
'unless specifically permitted' would seem to be too broad of a restriction, IOTW, if it's not legal, then it's illegal.
underthebridge wrote:
I believe that this is the section of Longview Muni Code. As I read it more in depth, I began to ponder just how many activities guaranteed under the constitution could one code violate. I was initially going to edit to only include what I thought was possibly relevant to firearms. But here's the whole thing.
9.22.040 Disorderly conduct.
It shall be a misdemeanor for any person to disturb or endanger the public peace or decency by any disorderly conduct.
The following acts, among others, are declared to be disorderly conduct:
(1) Use of obscene, abusive or profane language in a public or private place in a manner which incites or tends to incite a breach of the peace, or which disturbs the public peace or decency;
(2) Making any threats of violence to or against any other person;
(3) Lying, sitting, kneeling, leaning or standing in a public place in such a manner as to willfully impede, hinder, delay or obstruct other persons lawfully using such place for its intended use. The term “public place” for purposes of this section, shall be deemed and construed to include every public building, sidewalk, parking strip, public way, public park, public or private school, apartment house hallways, doorways and interiors of other commercial buildings to which the general public, having lawful business therein, is freely admitted; provided, however, this subsection shall not apply to injured persons or public officials, including police officers, who are performing their lawful duties;
(4) The operation of a motor vehicle within the city in a manner that disturbs the public peace and tranquility, whether by excessive speed, excessive noise, or by other operation manifesting disregard for reasonable safety precautions;
(5) Any noisy or riotous conduct either in a public or private place which causes a disturbance of the public peace and tranquility including, but not limited to, any person who screams, shouts, yells or gives commonly known offensive signs or plays musical instruments in a manner calculated to divert the attention of a motor vehicle operator to such person or that reasonably causes alarm for the safety of any person, persons, or property in the vicinity; provided, however, that this subsection shall not apply to any parent or parents seeking to gain the attention of their child or children by screams, or yells, or to any act expressly permitted by city ordinance or state law, or to any act of a public official, including police officers, while engaged in performing their lawful duties;
(6) Engaging in, promoting, encouraging, aiding or abetting any fight, riot or noisy and disorderly proceeding on any street or public place, or in any private building or dwelling, when persons residing in the vicinity are disturbed;
(7) Assault and battery upon any person on any street or public place, or in any private building or dwelling, when persons residing in the vicinity are disturbed;
(8) For any person by means of the use of the telephone to disturb, or tend to disturb, the peace, quiet or right of privacy of any other person or family by repeated or continuous anonymous or identified telephone messages intended to harass or disturb the person to whom the call is directed; or by single call or repeated calls, to use obscene, profane, indecent, or offensive language, or suggest any lewd or lascivious act over or through a telephone in this city; or to attempt to extort money or other thing of value from any person or family by means or use of the telephone or to threaten any physical violence or harm to any person or family; or to repeatedly and continuously ring the telephone of any person or family with intent to disturb or harass them; provided, however, that the normal use of the telephone for the purpose of requesting payment of debts or obligations or for other legitimate business purposes shall not constitute disorderly conduct;
(9) Intentionally disrupting any lawful assembly or meeting of persons without lawful authority;
(10) Intentionally obstructing vehicular or pedestrian traffic without lawful authority. (Ord. 2765 § 1, 2000).
I think that if the city actually proceeds with this, they will attempt to show the highlighted. A sharp attorney would be able to knock that down with the "shall not apply" clause. You could argue that open carry is not expressly permitted by state law and I would throughly enjoy arguing this case.
I got the sense from the video that these are descent people and would end up paying the fine. $250 versus an easy couple of grand to fight it; hell, he was pawning his shotgun to pay the phone bill and the car was broke down. Sounds like a genuine shit-storm to me.
That being said, I would hope that for her sake, the gun was left in the broke down car and only taken out in transferring to the ride that came to the rescue.
'unless specifically permitted' would seem to be too broad of a restriction, IOTW, if it's not legal, then it's illegal.