what a jumbled up mess of documents.
It's wonderfully unclear!
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
This is the part that bothers me as it says nothing of RAS
Q. If I am on patrol and observe a subject carrying a firearm openly on their hip
on a public sidewalk, can I stop them and run their information through a
records check?
A. Yes. The member may conduct an investigatory stop. The member should
use their best judgment in determining if the subject should be questioned
and released or other factors are involved and the subject should be placed
under arrest and transported to the appropriate detention facility.
BUT the next part down says NOT to Enforce Department Memorandum 14-04 which the ABOVE text was copied from note Daily informant is the KC MO PD daily newsletter in which the BELOW was copied from so it seems pretty clear to me that KC MO PD is to STAND DOWN and NOT enforce the OC KC City Council passed a few months ago.
September 12, 2014
Do NOTenforce BAN on 'Operi Carry'
In August the City of Kansas City amended Ordinance 50-261 to prohibit
openly carrying a firearm readily capable of lethal use. Due to recent action
by the Missouri General Assembly, that provision of Ordinance 50-261 is no
longer enforceable. For this reason, Department Memorandum 14-04
entitled "Open Carry of a Firearm" has been rescinded.
Members are reminded of the possibility that all subjects contacted at a
scene may be in possession of a firearm. Officers should use discretion and
their best judqrpent when making a determination on the best course of
action depending on the totality of the circumstances.
The first document is from 8/20/14....prior to the override. The second set of docs is subsequently afterwards. The policy changed with the override. The first doc is basically worthless....it tells them what to do prior to SB656; the second is their thoughts after SB656 was overrode.
True, but it's so unclear in that doc that I bet a lot of officers will still be stopping people like it says they should in the earlier doc.
The first document is from 8/20/14....prior to the override. The second set of docs is subsequently afterwards. The policy changed with the override. The first doc is basically worthless....it tells them what to do prior to SB656; the second is their thoughts after SB656 was overrode.
Just wondering what was in the HUGE REDACTED space!!!
Probably nothing sinister actually. If I had to guess, it's probably just a bunch of email addresses or something like that.
I received the info I request on open Carry in KC MO see attached PDF for info I received.
What a jumbled up mess of documents.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Page 5..."Would you please the officers in your division." ...maybe not a bad deal for the officers, depending on who is doing the pleasing.
Request the info again, this time only the official department memo stuff, not any of that spam contained in the e-mail chain. Also, pose a question regarding the intoxicated folks can't possess a firearm as it relates to the actual statutes. It seems that everything past the second comma in RSMo 571.030.1(5) is ignored. Also, how do they square 571.030.1(5) with 571.030.5. What is the "policy" as it relates to private property.I received the info I request on open Carry in KC MO see attached PDF for info I received.