not just missouri, best to avoid all cops

[mocat]

Mayor Q taking control of some of the police budget is already paying dividends.
For example watch as kcmo cops don't kill a black kid waving a gun around after bar close

[MakeItRain]

Mayor Q taking control of some of the police budget is already paying dividends.
For example watch as kcmo cops don't kill a black kid waving a gun around after bar close

Why didn't they taze ol boy tho?

[mocat]

Mayor Q taking control of some of the police budget is already paying dividends.
For example watch as kcmo cops don't kill a black kid waving a gun around after bar close

Why didn't they taze ol boy tho?

Idk. maybe bc his finger was on the trigger? This sounds flippant but I'm asking genuinely

[michigancat]

Was anyone hurt?

[michigancat]

Mayor Q taking control of some of the police budget is already paying dividends.
For example watch as kcmo cops don't kill a black kid waving a gun around after bar close

Why didn't they taze ol boy tho?

Idk. maybe bc his finger was on the trigger? This sounds flippant but I'm asking genuinely

It seems like tackling him worked fine

[MakeItRain]

I wasn't asking about the result, my eyes work fine, I was wondering why they let someone with a firearm drawn walk around in a group of people, like what's the police procedure at work here? I like where mocat is thinking.

[michigancat]

Is holding a handgun in public even illegal in Missouri?

[DQ12]

Is holding a handgun in public even illegal in Missouri?

*571.030.  Unlawful use of weapons — exceptions — penalties. — 1.  A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:
[...]
 (4)  Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or

[michigancat]

Is holding a handgun in public even illegal in Missouri?

*571.030.  Unlawful use of weapons — exceptions — penalties. — 1.  A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:
[...]
 (4)  Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or

Seems like there's a lot of room for interpretation there!

[DQ12]

Is holding a handgun in public even illegal in Missouri?

*571.030.  Unlawful use of weapons — exceptions — penalties. — 1.  A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:
[...]
 (4)  Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or

Seems like there's a lot of room for interpretation there!

Well, yeah, in some cases.  Not very much gray in the situation in the video though.

[michigancat]

It seems like anyone openly carrying would be in violation of that law.

[DQ12]

It seems like anyone openly carrying would be in violation of that law.

Nope.

[michigancat]

I'm not a lawyer, but some of these laws seem like they were written by some real dopes.

[michigancat]

It seems like anyone openly carrying would be in violation of that law.

Nope.

Any weapon is "readily capable of lethal use"

[DQ12]

It seems like anyone openly carrying would be in violation of that law.

Nope.

Any weapon is "readily capable of lethal use"

But not every openly carried weapon is "exhibited...in an angry or threatening manner."

[michigancat]

It seems like anyone openly carrying would be in violation of that law.

Nope.

Any weapon is "readily capable of lethal use"

But not every openly carried weapon is "exhibited...in any angry or threatening manner."

But it's always "capable" of being used that way. The law needs an editor is what I'm saying.

[DQ12]

It seems like anyone openly carrying would be in violation of that law.

Nope.

Any weapon is "readily capable of lethal use"

But not every openly carried weapon is "exhibited...in any angry or threatening manner."

But it's always "capable" of being used that way. The law needs an editor is what I'm saying.

I don't get why you're having a hard time with it.  That statute doesn't forbid open carrying.  It forbids, what basically amounts to, brandishing a deadly weapon. 

And not every "weapon" is readily capable of lethal force.

[michigancat]

It's just sloppy grammar.

[mocat]

can you legally hold a gun in your hand and walk around in public?

[mocat]

like as long as you're smiling while you do it it's ok?

[IPA4Me]

Erm. Not in Kentucky and we have some pretty lax open/concealed carry laws.

[catastrophe]

like as long as you're smiling while you do it it's ok?

I’d need to see it, but clutching a firearm with a big smile on your face sounds threatening AF to me.

[michigancat]

like as long as you're smiling while you do it it's ok?

I’d need to see it, but clutching a firearm with a big smile on your face sounds threatening AF to me.

anyone clutching a firearm (when not like hunting or at a range) seems pretty threatening regardless of facial expression. Like I see someone on the sidewalk with their hand on a gun I'm going to try to avoid them

[mocat]

I'm just trying to figure out the difference between holding a gun legally and illegally

[michigancat]

I'm just trying to figure out the difference between holding a gun legally and illegally

Like I said, there's plenty of room for interpretation!