If you are going to even attempt open carry I would get a VERY QUALIFIED LAWYER ON RETAINER & HAVE HIM ON SPEED DIAL because your getting arrested! Your thinking that your can OC almost anywhere should be severly re-thought. Just my two cents---
http://lcav.org/states/Missouri_State_Law_Summary.pdf#page=29
http://lcav.org/states/missouri.asp
These I cut and pasted from another for:
It shall be unlawful for any person carrying a firearm to willfully enter or go upon the premises or property of another, or to fire or discharge any firearm while on the premises or property of another without first having obtained the written permission from the owner, lessee or person in charge of such premises or property, and unless such person has said written permission on his person. This section shall not apply to a person carrying, firing or discharging any firearm while in the immediate presence of the owner, lessee, or person in charge of the property or premises, or to the entry upon the premises for the sole purpose of obtaining the written permission of the owner, lessee or person in charge of the property.
They said without the written permission from EVERY property owner, you'll be arrested.
Places that guarantee arrest if you open carry a firearm in their town:
Ellisville (Ordinance against Open Carry)
Maplewood (Tried pointing me to ordinance that relates to carrying on City owned property, then basically implied, try it and you'll be locked up)
Wildwood (They referred to that ordinance about needing permission. Promised trip to jail without it)
Rock Hill (Chief is going to get back to me next week, but said NO OPEN CARRY)
Webster Groves (Said “We believe that State Statutes 571.030.1 and 565.070.1(ASSAULT CHARGE FOR OPEN CARRY!) and our Municipal Code Sec. 70.225 generally prohibit and make illegal any open carry of a weapon in public.Anyone openly carrying a weapon in violation of these Statutes or our Municipal Code would be subject to arrest and prosecution.)
Places it SEEMS to be okay, but I'm not sure if I'm ready to try it
Ladue (The chief was very nice and said he would check into it for me and get back when he found out. He got back to me the next day and said it wasn’t against the law there, but it may concern people)
Chesterfield (a LT.said there were no laws against it, but said "Were someone to be caused sufficient alarm as to be threatened by the presence of the firearm, it is possible that a disturbance charge could result, depending on the scenario.")
Richmond Heights (said it's probably legal, but "Iwould highly discourage anyone from openly carrying a firearm as it surly would cause alarm by anyone witnessing such behavior.")
Fenton (a Lt. seemed professional and contacted the Fenton PA. They said there was nothing that made it illegal, but also added, “On a personal note I ask that you take careful consideration of the facts at hand if you elect to wear a firearm openly displayed in the City of Fenton , or anywhere for that matter. The open wearing of a firearm will generate concern among the public who see the firearm. Undoubtedly someone will call the police and officers will respond to your location. Usually the call will be dispatched as “man with a gun, flourishing of a weapon in progress, etc. Please understand that upon arrival the responding officers will contact you and attempt to collect enough information to determine whether or not a law violation is occurring. While this is happening I ask only that you exercise patience and cooperate so that the officers can perform the job they are paid to do and clear the call.â€
Some others said they would not even discuss anything relating to law or just pointed me towards their ordinances:
(Said “We believe that State Statutes 571.030.1 and 565.070.1(ASSAULT CHARGE FOR OPEN CARRY!) and our Municipal Code Sec. 70.225 generally prohibit and make illegal any open carry of a weapon in public. Anyone openly carrying a weapon in violation of these Statutes or our Municipal Code would be subject to arrest and prosecution.)
Assault in the third degree.
565.070. 1. A person commits the crime of assault in the third degree if:
(1) The person attempts to cause or recklessly causes physical injury to another person; or
(2) With criminal negligence the person causes physical injury to another person by means of a deadly weapon; or
(3) The person purposely places another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury; or
(4) The person recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death or serious physical injury to another person; or
(5) The person knowingly causes physical contact with another person knowing the other person will regard the contact as offensive or provocative; or
(6) The person knowingly causes physical contact with an incapacitated person, as defined in section 475.010, RSMo, which a reasonable person, who is not incapacitated, would consider offensive or provocative.
2. Except as provided in subsections 3 and 4 of this section, assault in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.
3. A person who violates the provisions of subdivision (3) or (5) of subsection 1 of this section is guilty of a class C misdemeanor.
4. A person who has pled guilty to or been found guilty of the crime of assault in the third degree more than two times against any family or household member as defined in section 455.010, RSMo, is guilty of a class D felony for the third or any subsequent commission of the crime of assault in the third degree when a class A misdemeanor. The offenses described in this subsection may be against the same family or household member or against different family or household members.
"Under sect 3 it stated that one person would PURPOSEFULLY put another person in apprehension of immediate physical injury."
Well excuse me, but there are some leo's I have been around that make me feel that I am in immediate physical danger due to their lack of knowledge of proper procedure, and their own ignorance of the law. Every time I get cut off in traffic I feel I am in immediate physical danger; do you think if I called Webster police dept and reported it as third degree assault they would send the same amount of police out "probably with guns un holstered" to apprehend the driver of the vehicle? Doubt it Webster Groves also stated:
"Said “We believe that State Statutes 571.030.1 and 565.070.1(ASSAULT CHARGE FOR OPEN CARRY!) and our Municipal Code Sec. 70.225 generally prohibit and make illegal any open carry of a weapon in public. "
Without pasting the entirety of the statute it begins with these key words:
" CARRIES CONCEALED
571.030. 1. A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly:
(1) Carries concealed upon or about his or her person a knife, a firearm, a blackjack or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use; or
(2) Sets a spring gun; or
(3) Discharges or shoots a firearm into a dwelling house, a railroad train, boat, aircraft, or motor vehicle as defined in section 302.010, RSMo, or any building or structure used for the assembling of people; or
(4) Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or
And their section
Sec. 70.225. Unlawful Use of Weapons Including Concealed Weapons. Is almost verbatum of the MO 571. Take note in section 4 " in a angry or threatening manner." wearing a side arm in a holster is not angry or threatening. Otherwise we could file this charge against any peace/police officer wearing a sidearm.
(4) Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or
This is why we have ccw laws and the entire 571 MO revised statute. It would seem that the St. Louis CO. ordinance #9) in regard to getting permission from every owner would be in direct conflict with CCW holder's rights to carry under MO 571 revised statutes.
Also you should not need permission to be on Public property as it is owned by the taxpayers and should be protected under the 2nd amendment.
Many people being "scared" and feeling threatened is vague and ambiguous, and leaves too much interpretation to a leo who shows up ready to go because there are firearms involved. It is amazing that governments/ municipalities, states, can all pass laws that contradict each other and even violate the rights guaranteed under the constitution to some how "protect" one view over another. While every law passed is a legislation of someone's morality, there is supposed to be a guarantee of Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. To prefer someone's opinion of what made them scared vs. my guaranteed right to bears arms is ridiculous and should be changed or rewritten to be MUCH more clear. I personally feel that too many people in authority that can carry firearms, want to be the only authority as it allows them to interpret/ laws and policies, and by use of force or threats of arrest for (lawful behavior protected under the constitution) to the disregard of the constitutional rights of LAW ABIDING US citizens.
I think that is a part; along with peaceable legal action; and democratic processes, of why our forefathers in grafted the 2nd amendment so allow law abiding citizens to protect themselves from law breaking government.
It is good that you are doing your homework before you OC.
If enough law abiding citizens vote in people that will uphold the constitution we may just see more and more open carry, and the passing of preemption in MO would do away with many of the road blocks you are running into.
