• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

656 and City parks

kylemoul

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2011
Messages
640
Location
st louis
From what I read, we can OC in city parks in MO as long as we have a CCW (for ones that are not OC friendly already) as before, some cities restricted OC, one being St Charles City. Hell, 656 took away all cities rights to restrict anything and have to be in compliance with 571.101 - 070.

How do you guys read it?
 

HP995

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
730
Location
MO, USA
AFAIK, yes, OC via CCW anywhere not restricted by MO or USC. I read it like you, and it's pretty clear cut, IMHO. (But disclaimer - IANAJ nor play one on TV.) :)
 

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
From what I read, we can OC in city parks in MO as long as we have a CCW (for ones that are not OC friendly already) as before, some cities restricted OC, one being St Charles City. Hell, 656 took away all cities rights to restrict anything and have to be in compliance with 571.101 - 070.

How do you guys read it?
And Amendment 5/the newly modified Article 1, Section 23 overrides 571.101 - 070, 21.750 (as modified by SB656), etc. etc.

You should read this thread: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...ose-encounter-of-the-unlawful-detainment-kind

AND, if you find a park district that is willing to go to the mat over their insistence that their park rules supercede A5/A1, S23, let us know. As I understand it, the individual stopped in the Springfield matter (BriKuz) is still pondering/planning his next move.
 
Top