Thread: Inquiry to Webster Groves Mayor
I've asked the Mayor and Atty of Webster to help clarify the intentions of their recent amendment to their codes on denying Open AND Closed Carry. It follows and is also attached as a Word doc. I'll let you know what they say....if anything.
Webster Groves Bill #8607
Entitled: An ordinance amending Chapter 70, Article III, Section 70.225, Subsection 8 entitled “Unlawful use of weapons including concealed weapons,” is hereby amended to prevent the carrying of lethal weapons in public either openly or concealed.
Chapter 70, Article III, Section 70.225, Subsection 8 reads:
“A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly: 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.”
Putting the prohibition – concealed or open – into Subsection 8 means it applies only to buildings owned by Webster. But that would be redundant, as the final phrase “…or political subdivision thereof” seems to sufficiently cover those properties. Something does not reconcile with placing the prohibition of Bill #8607 in Subsection 8.
Then, in a Webster-Kirkwood Times article date 11/17/08, Webster Police Chief Dale Curtis indicated that “…state statute is mute concerning open carrying of weapons, but Webster prohibits all open carry.” Chief Curtis’ usage of the phrase “…Webster prohibits all open carry” cannot be found anywhere in Chapter 70, Article III, Section 70.225, at least those provided in the previous link, which was updated through 6/30/2008.
Q#1: If I have not done a thorough perusal of Webster’s code, would you be so kind as to direct me to the municipal code that supports Chief Curtis’ assertion that open carry is prohibited throughout Webster Groves?
Q#2: Considering that using Subsection 8 seems a redundancy, is it your intent to use Bill #8607 to achieve Chief Curtis’ assertion, irrelevant of where it’s placed in the code?
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to responses that I’m certain will respect of our Constitution’s Second Amendment.