deepdiver
Campaign Veteran
There are glaring problems with the Order. The Order boils down to the zoo is a school so you can't carry there. But she says that's ok because you can carry in the parking lots and up to the gate to use the lock boxes, in other words in the non-gated areas of Zoo property. Except you can't. (emphasis mine):
Firstly, since she rules the Zoo is a school the firearm can't leave the vehicle to carry it to the lockboxes:
"571.107. 1. A concealed carry permit issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121, a valid concealed carry endorsement issued prior to August 28, 2013, or a concealed carry endorsement or permit issued by another state or political subdivision of another state shall authorize the person in whose name the permit or endorsement is issued to carry concealed firearms on or about his or her person or vehicle throughout the state. No concealed carry permit issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121, valid concealed carry endorsement issued prior to August 28, 2013, or a concealed carry endorsement or permit issued by another state or political subdivision of another state shall authorize any person to carry concealed firearms into:
(10) Any higher education institution or elementary or secondary school facility without the consent of the governing body of the higher education institution or a school official or the district school board, unless the person with the concealed carry endorsement or permit is a teacher or administrator of an elementary or secondary school who has been designated by his or her school district as a school protection officer and is carrying a firearm in a school within that district, in which case no consent is required. Possession of a firearm in a vehicle on the premises of any higher education institution or elementary or secondary school facility shall not be a criminal offense so long as the firearm is not removed from the vehicle or brandished while the vehicle is on the premises; "
And secondly, you can't even have it in the parking lot or on the sidewalks or any other part of the 90 acre "campus", gated and fenced or not, the limits and boundaries of which are NOT in any way delineated such that any law abiding citizen could readily determine the boundaries of same:
"It is hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed as follows: Defendant.. and anyone.. who has knowledge of this Order, is hereby restrained and enjoined, until further order of the Court, from entering upon Saint Louis Zoo property in possession of a firearmor any other weapon capable of lethal use, regardless of whether such weapon is possessed openly or concealed."
This final Order and the above matters contradict her earlier justification that "a preliminary injunction will not adversely impact the ability of Mr. Smith (or anyone else) to visit and enjoy the zoo; rather, they merely cannot carry guns with them while on the Zoo's gated grounds." ALL of that is totally irrelevant since her final order bans any firearms anywhere on any portion of any Zoo property, not just within the gated areas.
It is absolutely impossible for citizens, without specialized knowledge and researching of land records, to determine the boundaries of the property to which the Order applies. The St. Louis City Assessor maps do NOT show the parcel boundaries of the Zoo property itself, just showing Forest Park as one big area. And the order applies to every inch the Zoo owns so it would be quite easy for someone to violate the Order generally or be carrying on the premises of "the elementary and/or secondary "school facility" within the meaning of this part of the statute" as the Order reads thinking they are just in Forest Park generally and not aware that they are actually on Zoo property.
So in this matter, the justification of "The Court notes a preliminary injunction will not adversely impact the ability of Mr. Smith (or anyone else) to visit and enjoy the zoo; rather, they merely cannot carry guns with them while on the Zoo's gated grounds." is completely wrong and contradicted in several ways by the entirety of the Order.
Firstly, since she rules the Zoo is a school the firearm can't leave the vehicle to carry it to the lockboxes:
"571.107. 1. A concealed carry permit issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121, a valid concealed carry endorsement issued prior to August 28, 2013, or a concealed carry endorsement or permit issued by another state or political subdivision of another state shall authorize the person in whose name the permit or endorsement is issued to carry concealed firearms on or about his or her person or vehicle throughout the state. No concealed carry permit issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121, valid concealed carry endorsement issued prior to August 28, 2013, or a concealed carry endorsement or permit issued by another state or political subdivision of another state shall authorize any person to carry concealed firearms into:
(10) Any higher education institution or elementary or secondary school facility without the consent of the governing body of the higher education institution or a school official or the district school board, unless the person with the concealed carry endorsement or permit is a teacher or administrator of an elementary or secondary school who has been designated by his or her school district as a school protection officer and is carrying a firearm in a school within that district, in which case no consent is required. Possession of a firearm in a vehicle on the premises of any higher education institution or elementary or secondary school facility shall not be a criminal offense so long as the firearm is not removed from the vehicle or brandished while the vehicle is on the premises; "
And secondly, you can't even have it in the parking lot or on the sidewalks or any other part of the 90 acre "campus", gated and fenced or not, the limits and boundaries of which are NOT in any way delineated such that any law abiding citizen could readily determine the boundaries of same:
"It is hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed as follows: Defendant.. and anyone.. who has knowledge of this Order, is hereby restrained and enjoined, until further order of the Court, from entering upon Saint Louis Zoo property in possession of a firearmor any other weapon capable of lethal use, regardless of whether such weapon is possessed openly or concealed."
This final Order and the above matters contradict her earlier justification that "a preliminary injunction will not adversely impact the ability of Mr. Smith (or anyone else) to visit and enjoy the zoo; rather, they merely cannot carry guns with them while on the Zoo's gated grounds." ALL of that is totally irrelevant since her final order bans any firearms anywhere on any portion of any Zoo property, not just within the gated areas.
It is absolutely impossible for citizens, without specialized knowledge and researching of land records, to determine the boundaries of the property to which the Order applies. The St. Louis City Assessor maps do NOT show the parcel boundaries of the Zoo property itself, just showing Forest Park as one big area. And the order applies to every inch the Zoo owns so it would be quite easy for someone to violate the Order generally or be carrying on the premises of "the elementary and/or secondary "school facility" within the meaning of this part of the statute" as the Order reads thinking they are just in Forest Park generally and not aware that they are actually on Zoo property.
So in this matter, the justification of "The Court notes a preliminary injunction will not adversely impact the ability of Mr. Smith (or anyone else) to visit and enjoy the zoo; rather, they merely cannot carry guns with them while on the Zoo's gated grounds." is completely wrong and contradicted in several ways by the entirety of the Order.