search
top

Missouri Town Bans Open Carry

More wages of Open Carry Texas. Missouri has pretty thorough preemption, but local communities are allowed to ban open carry of firearms:

A southwest Missouri community at the Lake of the Ozarks has banned the open carrying of firearms, even by people who have a conceal-and-carry permit, to avoid frightening off potential tourists.

I don’t know what’s been happening lately to give these folks the idea that people would be frightened off by the open carry if firearms. I doubt they get news from Texas all the way up there in Missouri.

There’s currently a bill sitting on Jay Nixon’s desk that would preempt all of this, but he’s not made it clear whether he’ll sign it. Think what’s going on in Texas is helping with that?

14 Responses to “Missouri Town Bans Open Carry”

  1. Dano says:

    I think I’m going to start OC’ing an axe or chainsaw. The axe is a defensive form of arms, and has a dual use – even though I don’t live in a forest . It’s no more asinine to walk around with an axe than it is to carry a scope out tapco SKS.

  2. Kansas Gunner says:

    Too bad that they passed an illegal and unenforceable law. Here is the relevant bit of Missouri Statute:

    MO. REV. STAT ยง 21.750. Firearms legislation preemption by general assembly, exceptions
    1. The general assembly hereby occupies and preempts the entire field of legislation touching in any way firearms, components, ammunition and supplies to the complete exclusion of any order, ordinance or regulation by any political subdivision of this state. Any existing or future orders, ordinances or regulations in this field are hereby and shall be null and void except as provided in subsection 3 of this section.
    2. No county, city, town, village, municipality, or other political subdivision of this state shall adopt any order, ordinance or regulation concerning in any way the sale, purchase, purchase delay, transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permit, registration, taxation other than sales and compensating use taxes or other controls on firearms, components, ammunition, and supplies except as provided in subsection 3 of this section.
    3. Nothing contained in this section shall prohibit any ordinance of any political subdivision which conforms exactly with any of the provisions of sections 571.010 to 571.070, RSMo, with appropriate penalty provisions, or which regulates the open carrying of firearms readily capable of lethal use or the discharge of firearms within a jurisdiction. This section shall take effect on January 1, 1985.

    • Kansas Gunner says:

      I tried to edit my above comment but it didn’t seem to work. Anyway I goofed by skimming and didn’t catch the caveat in section three that allowed for regulating open carry, I mistakenly thought it only applied to discharge. SO the big question is does this ordinance meet the requirements of 571.010 to 571.070 exactly?

      • Joel Stoner says:

        Revised Statutes of Missouri (RSMO) Chapter 571.010-571.070, mostly deals with the Illegal actions of using a firearm. The Preemption law 21.750 section 3, allows regulation of Open Carry, as long as the Ordinance is not counter to 571.010-571.070.

        I’ve been talking to Missouri legislature members for a few years about fixing this section of the preemption law. It was included for St Louis, and Kansas City. So that they would not oppose the Preemption law. Now that there is becoming a patchwork of Cities banning Open Carry, the Missouri Legislature is looking into fixing it.

        While it is not as strong as other preemption laws, it does make invalid any ordinances that deal with anything firearm related besides open carry.

  3. McThag says:

    If the town was forbidden to pass such a ban would the people be less frightened?

  4. CarlosT says:

    Thanks, “gun-friendly” Texas.

  5. harleycowboy says:

    I’m not a big fan of OC. How long will it be before someone steals an OC weapon and proceeds to go stupid? Kept it covered up and let them guess who’s got one.

    • Alpheus says:

      I am aware of at least a couple of reasons why OC sholud still be legal, though.

      First, carrying a gun in the open can sometimes be more comfortable, and is certainly easier to access. Indeed, given someone’s handicapped condition, it may even be impossible or extraordinarily difficult to carry concealed!

      Second (and apparently this is a problem in Texas), if OC is illegal, even when you have a license to carry, then a minor slip of clothing can mean that you are breaking the law. Legal OC means that if such a slip happens, you aren’t going to have the potential of facing jail time or fines, along with the possibility of losing your license to carry.

      This isn’t to justify OCIYF*, though. If you’re going to carry open, you need to be as polite, as neatly dressed as possible, and even as discreet as possible–fourfold more so if you’re going to open carry a rifle! (If you’re loudly protesting while you OC, you’re probably doing it wrong, and if you’re doing it in a restaurant, you’re *certainly* doing it wrong!)

      (*Open Carry In Your Face)

      • P.M. says:

        Yeah, protecting CCWers who “print” a bit or inadvertently expose the gun is one solid reason why handgun OC needs to be legal.

        Also, on your own property, especially in a rural area, there is not even a colorable reason for requiring concealment.

        Totally agree about OCIYF.

  6. topofthechain says:

    Governor Nixon has in the past, when it came to firearms related legislation, did nothing and allowed the bill to become law.

    Related to this is that people claim they don’t like open carry. That is fine, no one is forcing you to strap your heater on in a drop leg tacticool holster and look like a backup for your local SWAT team.

    It’s much easier for everyone to have the right to open carry and make a choice not to exercise it, than it is to ban it and fight for it.

  7. Troy says:

    What a crock to try to blame this on the TOC group. Why not put the blame where it lies? The law makers.

    TOC has done very little to hurt gun right just as MDA has done very little to hurt gun rights. They are both groups that get way to much media attention that all they are.

    • Geodkyt says:

      Except for the fact that legislators point directly at OCT’s antics as the reasons they (who previously were counted on to vote in favor of OC) are not going to support OC.

      OCT has done MORE than MDA to screw over gun owners in general. And they did MOST of it after the adults in the OC activist world realized what was happening in Starbucks once longarm OC’ers started posing (and, more importantly, POSTING) in Starbucks with tricked out tacticool rifles in urban and suburban areas.

      OCT generates BAD PRESS, which scares legislators (who are afraid of Suzy Soccermom and Elmer Fudd’s reactions in the voting booths if they vote to legalize OC).

  8. SDN says:

    “the right privilege to keep and bear arms shall be infringed whenever the image is bad”

    Fixed that pesky 2nd Amendment.

  9. awesome says:

    The people will let Open carry go away because they can conceal…guess what it costs them money to conceal when it should be a right to carry a weapon…way to go america

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SayUncle » The wages of stupid - […] Missouri town bans OC because, well, OCers scare people. […]
top