Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 39

Thread: Maplewood moves to ban open carry of firearms

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    107

    Maplewood moves to ban open carry of firearms


  2. #2
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    Quicker than I thought, but not a surprised at any level.

    If it does not scare the legislators off of HB841 as well I will be surprised. Depends upon the anti's tactics, they may well run from it.

    I find myself perplexed a bit, I want to blame Brett, HOWEVER, that RAS issues is still unresolved and he may well be a victim of circumstance if they did indeed not have it.

    For those whom feel the comments from the cell do not count, they might not in court but if the anti's make him the posterboy, the court of public opinion already has lawmakers running, any more questions?

    The rules are simple, DON'T say ANYTHING and surely do not say STUPID stuff cause when you do, WE ALL PAY!

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    KCMO
    Posts
    7
    It's really unfortunate this incident turned out the way it did in the public view. Not only for the rightful gun owners in Maplewood, but for the whole OC cause.

    Now it seems likely there will be one more city to ban OC in MO. At least one Councilperson kept their wits; saying, "We're reacting too quickly."

    Sadly, that one is the minority.

  4. #4
    Regular Member mspgunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ellisville, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,966
    The ordinance hasn't passed completely yet. It requires final approval at the next City Council meeting on April 12.
    Anyone here live inMaplewood? Willing to go and speak before the City Council. Here is the chance. I don't know if they would be receptive to outsiders?
    If you pull it, you use it. If you pull it and you don't use it, you've done some thing wrong and you might not get another chance. Think about it before you pack it!
    I worked 24/7 for 2A OC rights! Don't like what I did? Try it yourself, it was my full time job!
    Certified NRA Range Safety Officer - RSO

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Jefferson City, Mo., ,
    Posts
    490
    This is exactly the thing the OC's don't need. A bad rep. for the cause, and that's exactly what they got.

    Be careful what you wish for.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    I know I will get blamed for this, but regardless of my idiotic comments after arrest, this was going to happen just because someone open carried there.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    St. Charles
    Posts
    96
    Quote Originally Posted by lancers View Post
    I know I will get blamed for this, but regardless of my idiotic comments after arrest, this was going to happen just because someone open carried there.
    That's not true. If I remember correctly, Doc has had at least one meet up in Maplewood. The City Hall Tour passed through there not that long ago, if my memory serves me right.

    The problem is exactly what you said afterwards. If you could have kept your (explicit) mouth shut, then Fox would have never run the segment and the city council wouldn't be making a big fuss.

    You were detained illegally. They had NO right to disarm you. But none of that matters now because of your past and your threatening comments.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by StevenSTL View Post
    That's not true. If I remember correctly, Doc has had at least one meet up in Maplewood. The City Hall Tour passed through there not that long ago, if my memory serves me right.

    The problem is exactly what you said afterwards. If you could have kept your (explicit) mouth shut, then Fox would have never run the segment and the city council wouldn't be making a big fuss.

    You were detained illegally. They had NO right to disarm you. But none of that matters now because of your past and your threatening comments.
    To clarify, I meant as soon as the police showed up to someone open carrying. This was in the works the first week after I was arrested, not after Monday nights news broadcast.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    1,012
    Quote Originally Posted by StevenSTL View Post
    That's not true. If I remember correctly, Doc has had at least one meet up in Maplewood. The City Hall Tour passed through there not that long ago, if my memory serves me right.

    The problem is exactly what you said afterwards. If you could have kept your (explicit) mouth shut, then Fox would have never run the segment and the city council wouldn't be making a big fuss.

    You were detained illegally. They had NO right to disarm you. But none of that matters now because of your past and your threatening comments.
    First, I'm not even vaguely condoning lancers' comments in the cell. He probably wasn't the first to openly carry in the town. But, I think he's right in the respect that he is the first one that has come to the attention of the LEO's or the media. I agree with you that had he kept his mouth shut, we would be very unlikely to be where we are today. I don't think his past matters that much. He does appear to like to bait and trap police departments, according to the media, but it's his comments that did all of the damage. The rest was just fluff.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Jefferson City, Mo., ,
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by kcgunfan View Post
    I don't think his past matters that much. He does appear to like to bait and trap police departments, according to the media, but it's his comments that did all of the damage.
    I think his previous record has alot to do with it. He hassles the police, they make his world harder. Karma .

    Also, it just goes to show that not all publicity is good.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Tony4310's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florissant, MO
    Posts
    474
    Great, now other cities will start passing no OC laws and I'll have to move. Thanks a lot!

  12. #12
    Regular Member Tony4310's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florissant, MO
    Posts
    474
    I plan to switch my eye doctor that is in Maplewood to another one today!

    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Boycott Maplewood, it ain't that big.

  13. #13
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    Well lets put the brakes on pointing a finger at Brett.

    Why?

    Well the cops are calling us all clowns and even if you say Brett is a clown, the constitution does not say everyone but clowns does it?

    There was editing within the fox2 tape and Brett really may have said "they could not have been afraid" right before he said I could have shot them etc. If you watch it again it is obvious he was speaking before they turned the audio on.

    The point remains they may or may not have had any reason to approach him.

    It also remains that his gun is in a crime lab some where but he was not charged he was jailed for an unrelated traffic charge.

    Does that mean if I speed through Maple wood and a cop sees my gun when he pulls me over he can grab it and send it off?

    Brett may not be the next OC spokesman or gun rights advocate, that does not mean cops get to squash his rights does it?

    I am not a fan, I am very disappointed, but I would tend to ask anyone to reconsider prior to tossing him under the bus just yet and I am really pissed at him.

    If the cops had RAS well that lends them the merit they need for the detainment and arrest, does not make sending the gun to a lab a brilliant idea does it?

    He screwed up huge, he did not shut up and hire a lawyer, that did not renounce his citizenship and his rights still have every bit as much meaning as my own.

  14. #14
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by LMTD View Post
    Well lets put the brakes on pointing a finger at Brett.
    I agree we should stop pointing fingers and focus on damage control.

    That said,

    There was editing within the fox2 tape and Brett really may have said "they could not have been afraid" right before he said I could have shot them etc. If you watch it again it is obvious he was speaking before they turned the audio on.
    I dont think there is a level on context that would soften what was said and recorded, nor do i think the circumstances lend themselves to a misunderstood context.

    It also remains that his gun is in a crime lab some where but he was not charged he was jailed for an unrelated traffic charge.
    Does that mean if I speed through Maple wood and a cop sees my gun when he pulls me over he can grab it and send it off?
    His gun is most likely being held because of the possible class-c felony charge of carrying while having an active warrant or "possessing a firearm while a fugitive from justice"

    Brett may not be the next OC spokesman or gun rights advocate, that does not mean cops get to squash his rights does it?
    If the cops had RAS well that lends them the merit they need for the detainment and arrest, does not make sending the gun to a lab a brilliant idea does it?
    We are assuming they did not have RAS or that the court wont uphold RAS as it panned out

    He screwed up huge, he did not shut up and hire a lawyer, that did not renounce his citizenship and his rights still have every bit as much meaning as my own.
    -Agreed.
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  15. #15
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924

    Email sent

    Several issues need accurate consideration prior to the board moving to enact a new law restricting legally openly carried firearms by all citizens within the city of Maplewood.

    1. What is the purpose of the new law? Since it has been associated with the recent situation with Mr. Darrow is it clear to all of the representatives that the only difference this law would make in that specific case is that Mr. Darrow would simply hide his firearm as it is apparent that he indeed has a concealed weapons permit and can re-enter Walmart at anytime with a firearm as long as it is hidden.

    2. How many arrest have your officers made where a criminal was openly carrying a firearm in the past year? I would suggest that an honest review would indicate very few if any at all. Why? Because criminals hide their weapons just as they attempt to hide their actions and intent.

    3. How many calls within the last year has the department had on openly carried firearms within Maplewood? I would again offer very few if any despite their having been known openly carried firearms in Maplewood. It seems the council is dramatically over reacting to ONE person whom called in with concern compared to the thousands whom live in the city.

    4. If a person has made an active decision to commit the crime of armed robbery, I would question the board’s logic that that person would be deterred at any level by an ordinance dictating the way they would carry the firearm as it is clear they already have criminal intent.

    5. When the dispatcher received the call did they inform the caller that open carry is legal? Did the officers approach the person as someone doing nothing illegal? Is it reasonable for a police officer to assume anyone with a firearm has criminal intent thereby they should detain and investigate? There is indeed case law that clearly defines it is not reasonable.

    6. Are you considering this new law in an effort to protect citizens and their rights or is it a reaction to protect the city government from misconduct by detaining citizens whom have broken no laws? Our constitutions, both federal and state clearly define they are to protect citizens from misconduct on the part of the government.

    Maplewood is about to consider creation of a new ordinance for no real definable reason. There has been plenty of drama surrounding it, but we do not create laws because of dramatic performances. We should create laws to against criminal actions. While I make no claim to have witnessed the event, I do have questions regarding the initial contact as it seems Mr. Darrow was indeed not charged with any crime indicating he was up to no good.

    Did he brandish the weapon? Did he verbalize any threat to anyone within the store prior to the officers arriving? Was he trying to hide his person when the police arrived? Did he do ANYTHING to indicate he might be involved in criminal activity or about to become involved in it? I ask these questions because he was not charged with anything indicating that occurred. The charges that have been forwarded and refused by the prosecutor at this time have nothing to do with the initial contact.
    It occurs to me that instead of trying to protect the citizens of Maplewood with a law that will do nothing to prevent firearms being carried instead the board may be doing so for another reason.

    Perhaps they are trying to protect the city government from its own misconduct and violating the civil rights of its citizens.

    Some might argue that the city needs to do so as Mr. Darrow has been painted with a broad brush as someone “baiting” police. I cannot speak to his motives, but as a fisherman of over 40 years I can tell you I have never caught a fish that did not bite. I am wondering if perhaps the council and yourself might not be better serving those you serve, the citizens, to be drafting an ordinance to better train officers on how to better deal with something they do not agree with but is perfectly legal instead.

    Thank you for taking the time to consider this tax payers position and I pray you opt to protect my rights and freedoms and do not react to a single event.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    st. louis
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by lancers View Post
    I know I will get blamed for this, but regardless of my idiotic comments after arrest, this was going to happen just because someone open carried there.
    Troll here,

    What idiotic comments? I thought you said they were misunderstood and/or taken out of context by Fox 2?

    People, this is not the wild wild west and you are not Doc Holiday.

    After you take your show to Maplewood, why don't you gather for a rally at Fairgrounds Park in North St. Louis on a warm spring evening around 6pm? Let us all know how that turns out.

    Tuck your pistol in your trousers and let it go folks.

    This comes down to a longing for attention. And for that, I would have to put the blame on your parents.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by woody22 View Post
    Troll here,

    What idiotic comments? I thought you said they were misunderstood and/or taken out of context by Fox 2?

    People, this is not the wild wild west and you are not Doc Holiday.

    After you take your show to Maplewood, why don't you gather for a rally at Fairgrounds Park in North St. Louis on a warm spring evening around 6pm? Let us all know how that turns out.

    Tuck your pistol in your trousers and let it go folks.

    This comes down to a longing for attention. And for that, I would have to put the blame on your parents.
    Officer, I meant that I even let any words slip out of my mouth that the cops would give to the media to mix and match to make something they could put on the news.

    I'm not scared of North St. Louis. I've driven around there a lot of times- even in the middle of the night. I was stopped one time by SCAT or some other undercover unit in a beat up lumina for being a, "white kid in the hood". They were alright though and let me go pretty quickly when they figured out I wasn't doing anything wrong.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by woody22 View Post
    Troll here,

    Tuck your pistol in your trousers and let it go folks.
    .
    Maybe you could explain the point of having the right to self defense and legality of open carry....

    ...then voluntarily choosing to forfeit them?

    What is the point of something being legal.....

    ..then getting TROLLED for doing it?

    Yes, eating a ham sandwich is completely legal.....

    Why don't you go to a food lover's forum and tell themthey should volunteer to not eat ham sandwiches?

    Riding a bicycle is completely legal....

    Why don't you go to a cycling forum and tell them they shouldn't ride bicycles?

    Well, OPENLY CARRYING A FIREARM IS COMPLETELY LEGAL.

    Yet, you argue we shouldn't do it.

    I don't see anywhere in the constitution that eating ham sandwiches and riding bicycles is constitutionally protected.

    However, I CAN see where the right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Yet, you want to argue that we should not participate in a constitutionally protected and perfectly legal activity simply by volunteering NOT to?

    Maybe you could explain the point of having constitutionally protected rights in the first place if everyone is simply supposed to voluntarily not use them?
    Last edited by Superlite27; 03-25-2011 at 09:14 AM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Imperial, Missouri.
    Posts
    105
    Superlite27 very well spoken!!!! My only fear is the other legal municipalities may follow suit with Maplewood. Doc and the rest of the men & women are making GREAT strides with no issues and hopefully they continue their work. Although it would be neat if the local news media did a piece on a meet and greet with OCer's and get an idea not everyone's a bad guy who openly carry firearms. Hell contact Elliot Davis???? He's always finding things worng in municipalities, not sure if he'd be interested though. Although this is desperate time for GOOD PR and we dont need anyhting more to happen.

    Jim

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Imperial, Missouri.
    Posts
    105
    LMTD: great email very well worded! Have you gotten a reply as of yet?

    Jim

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Spfld, Mo.
    Posts
    430
    That certainly reads like a knee-jerk rection to: Oh crap, we're about to get sued and LOSE!

    So I'm going to pose the question to all of you OC advocates.

    How do we go about getting our legislators to submit a bill or how do we get the courts to address the fact that the dreaded 1984 law that gave municipalities this authority is actually a violation of 2A? It was a 2A violation when it was signed into law since CC was illegal at the time per the Missouri Constitution.
    Last edited by REALteach4u; 03-25-2011 at 11:56 AM.

  22. #22
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    Quote Originally Posted by jad316 View Post
    LMTD: great email very well worded! Have you gotten a reply as of yet?

    Jim
    None yet, but not really expecting any to be honest.

    It was too long and they will likely not read it.

  23. #23
    Regular Member mspgunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ellisville, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,966
    Quote Originally Posted by REALteach4u View Post
    That certainly reads like a knee-jerk rection to: Oh crap, we're about to get sued and LOSE!

    So I'm going to pose the question to all of you OC advocates.

    How do we go about getting our legislators to submit a bill or how do we get the courts to address the fact that the dreaded 1984 law that gave municipalities this authority is actually a violation of 2A? It was a 2A violation when it was signed into law since CC was illegal at the time per the Missouri Constitution.
    Not going to happen! Just not.

    As far as Maplewood goes, I may put on a coat and tie and go testify against it. I've been successful before in Wildwood, that was an airsoft gun issue for kids, but I got the local ordinance ended. Ok, we do some OC get togethers, big woof. I got used to it, but here is where it really matters, in a legal and local forum. Don't show up to protest, that will do not good. Show up, dress well and speak up. OC get togethers are OK, put on your best face and go to Maplewood April 12th and make your point, the forum is good for discussion, the meat is in the public venue!
    If you pull it, you use it. If you pull it and you don't use it, you've done some thing wrong and you might not get another chance. Think about it before you pack it!
    I worked 24/7 for 2A OC rights! Don't like what I did? Try it yourself, it was my full time job!
    Certified NRA Range Safety Officer - RSO

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    The 96th General Assembly of The Missouri State Legislature is Currently Considering House Bill 841, which, Adds a New Section of Missouri revised Statute, to Read:

    R.S.Mo. 571.037. Notwithstanding any other Provision of State Law or Local Ordinance any Person who has a Valid Concealed Carry Endorsement may Openly Carry Firearms on or about His or Her Person or within a Vehicle.

  25. #25
    Regular Member mspgunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Ellisville, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,966
    Quote Originally Posted by aadvark View Post
    The 96th General Assembly of The Missouri State Legislature is Currently Considering House Bill 841, which, Adds a New Section of Missouri revised Statute, to Read:

    R.S.Mo. 571.037. Notwithstanding any other Provision of State Law or Local Ordinance any Person who has a Valid Concealed Carry Endorsement may Openly Carry Firearms on or about His or Her Person or within a Vehicle.
    This bill is not going any where. Not assigned to committee, it is just going to die.
    If you pull it, you use it. If you pull it and you don't use it, you've done some thing wrong and you might not get another chance. Think about it before you pack it!
    I worked 24/7 for 2A OC rights! Don't like what I did? Try it yourself, it was my full time job!
    Certified NRA Range Safety Officer - RSO

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •