Judge Blocks MS Open Carry Law Over Fears of “Blood In The Streets”

That dog will hunt (courtesy opencarry.org)

Every single time a new law is passed that would expand gun rights, the same rallying cry goes up from the Gun Control Industrial Complex: blood in the streets, and wild west, shoot-em-up atmosphere. Never mind the dozens of states with existing laws that go further than the one that’s proposed. And ignore the empirical evidence to the contrary. Allowing people to carry guns will inevitably lead to people shooting each other over the slightest dispute or provocation. That’s the usual refrain. And they’ve done such a good job of painting that fictitious picture that a sympathetic state judge in Mississippi has placed an injunction on the implementation of a recently-passed open carry law . . .

From the Associated Press:

A state judge blocked Mississippi’s open-carry gun law from taking effect next week, writing in a Friday ruling that the law was vague and that an injunction was needed to prevent irreparable harm.

“Irreparable harm” being code for “blood in the streets.”

Never — not in one instance ever recorded — has the liberalization of gun laws ever led to an increase in crime in the manner in which it’s always predicted by the gun grabbing community. And yet they continue to beat that dead horse as if it were Seabiscuit running down the home stretch.

For this instance, I think the bill’s Republican sponsor puts it best:

“I never thought I’d live to see a lawsuit filed to say that the Constitution is unconstitutional, which is basically what they’re saying,” Gipson told The Associated Press after the judge’s ruling. “I’m confident that in the end, our Second Amendment rights will be upheld.”

I wonder, could we see an open carry case before the Supreme Court?

comments

  1. avatar Mark N. says:

    I guess the judge and the DA don’t plan on being re-elected, because this was certainly a career ending bonehead move. Not surprising that the Southern Poverty Law Center is behind it. “The plaintiffs are trying to stop mayhem. We’re looking at a wild, wild West scenario,” Owens said. Uh huh. Where have I heard that before?

    1. avatar WA_2A says:

      Violent crime rates were lower in the 1800s than they have ever been in the modern era. Nice try, antis, but Red Dead Redemption and Western movies are not a valid source, just like you can’t outlaw suppressors based on something you saw on James Bond.

      1. avatar Chris says:

        Or force the implementation and use of biometric devices on firearms just because “007 has one”…

      2. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

        And they were much lower in the “wild west” than they were in places like Chicago and New York City.

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      There’s always their pension.

  2. avatar Matt in FL says:

    The Clarion-Ledger reported that Jody Owens, an attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center, said those seeking to block the law are trying to stop mayhem.

    “The plaintiffs are trying to stop mayhem. We’re looking at a wild, wild West scenario,” Owens said.

    Kay. Now that we’ve got the stupidity over with, let’s get to reality.

    First, what the Mississippi State Constitution says: The right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but the legislature may regulate or forbid carrying concealed weapons. Art. III, § 12 (enacted 1890, art. 3, § 12). (Source)

    From the article: House Bill 2 clarifies that people in Mississippi don’t need any kind of state-issued permit to carry a gun that’s not concealed.

    This is actually an interesting case. While open carry was not specifically prohibited in Mississippi, the old law was actually written so that a firearm even partially covered was considered concealed. In a holster was considered partially concealed. So while technically open carry was allowed, you’d basically have to have it on a string around your neck to avoid running afoul of the concealment law. If you wanted to open carry, you needed a concealed weapons permit.

    Mississippi is a shall issue state, and the requirements were not particularly onerous, but people who didn’t want to (or couldn’t afford to) get a concealed weapons permit were being unfairly denied their rights. Which leads us to the line from the article about “needing a permit.” Mississippi House Bill 2, due to take effect 7/1/2013, changes that. Specifically, the following language was added:

    (4) For the purposes of this section, “concealed” means hidden or obscured from common observation and shall not include any weapon listed in subsection (1) of this section, including, but not limited to, a loaded or unloaded pistol carried upon the person in a sheath, belt holster or shoulder holster that is wholly or partially visible, or carried upon the person in a scabbard or case for carrying the weapon that is wholly or partially visible. (Source)

    So what the bill does is simply make it so that a standard holstered firearm is no longer “concealed” and reaffirms the statement that “concealed means concealed.”

    I can’t believe the original wording was an accident, and it was pretty cunning how it was written to allow concealed carry while at the same time preventing open carry. Hopefully this all works out the way it should in the end.

  3. avatar 505markf says:

    I live in the wild west (NM), and open carry is an interesting thing historicaly, at least out here. In much of the West, open carry historically was the stand-up, law abiding thing to do. Concealed carry was the realm of scoundrels and others who were sneaky and clearly up to no good. If you were an honest man and a forthright citizen, you kept a heater on your hip, in plain sight, where all can see it. Of course, that was before guns became evil and having them in plain sight was enough to make civilized and evolved people swoon. Damn, but history is funny sometimes.

  4. avatar Gtfoxy says:

    No wild-west scenarios here in WI now with 200k CC holders…

    And the wild west was tamed with what? Firearms! It wasn’t wild because of them.

    And so another nail in the coffin to those opposed to gun rights in the old miss.

    And there is that pesky CC mandate like what IL is dealing with…

    1. avatar Bret says:

      Never mind that even before cc Wisconsin’s had open carry for years. No wild west violence then either.

      1. avatar Randy says:

        +1 !!!

    2. avatar Chip says:

      I’m still waiting on the shoot-outs to begin on the streets of Florida. We have over a million permit holders now so we are obviously just a powder-keg of violence just waiting for some little thing to set us off.

  5. avatar Shawn says:

    The wild west had very low murder rates. Only Hollywood has made the wild west out to be this shoot them up thing that everyone thinks it is. I would love the wild west murder rates plus because everyone had guns people were more polite then they are today. There was more respect then there is today.

    1. avatar 505markf says:

      And perhaps more civic responsibility for safety. Consider that when the Dalton Gang rode into town, it was the citizens who fired them up. Lots of Civil War vets out west after the war, and darned if all of them weren’t armed. Certainly there were towns where things were rough and rowdy in the West, but that was also true in NYC and oher places at the same time, though more on a neighborhood level. These people need to get an understanding of the Wild West from more research than watching some old western movies.

      1. avatar OldBenTurninginGrave says:

        My guess is they probably understand quite well. The antis are seeking to persuade, not to inform.

        1. avatar DavidT says:

          Rule, not persuade. They can’t stand the thought of people being less dependent on government, in any way.

  6. avatar Mike B says:

    I’m all for concealed carry but I don’t think open carry is necessary in an urban environment. For those of us that currently carry we try to avoid attention. Open carry does just te opposite. Also you have to think about all te idiot and thugs who would start to open carry just to look cool an the minute one of them does something stupid we are backed to where we were post newtown

    1. avatar In Memphis says:

      Because all the thugs here in Memphis OC…

      1. avatar Rich7553 says:

        A 5-year study done by the FBI found that as a rule, criminals do not openly carry nor do they use holsters, even in states where open carry is lawful.

        1. avatar rosignol says:

          I dunno if it’s a national policy, but where I live the new cops spend the first couple months on duty manning the city lockup. This is partly so they can get up to speed on the specific procedures for that particular department, and partly so they will be able to recognize a significant number of the habitual offenders in the area on sight.

        2. avatar Voodoo Meat Bucket says:

          Thanks for this info. I’m going to plaster it everywhere.

    2. avatar Matt in FL says:

      I appreciate your opinion, but it’s completely irrelevant to this post. Whether or not you or anyone else likes open carry, or thinks it’s a good idea, it’s supposed to be legal in Mississippi, and this judge and DA are circumventing the law that makes that legality explicit.

    3. avatar Grege says:

      I have a hard time believing that a “thug” or anyone up to nefarious activities would even consider announcing that they are packing a heater. That just sounds like an easy way to attract unwanted attention from the fuzz.

    4. avatar tdiinva says:

      I am dog sitting for my son here in Loveland Colorado and I have been out all over town with my XD/m strapped on my hip. Most people don’t even notice and those who do don’t care.

    5. avatar Robert M says:

      3 Things wrong with what you said.

      1) If Open Carry gets you attention then why would Thugs want to draw attention themselves. Most of the thugs I have had the displeasure of having to deal with don’t like attention because it increases there changes of getting caught.

      2) Is it more likely is a thug open carrying a gun doing a shot out then one concealed carrying? If anything it would make them less like if they both were open carrying there would be no question if the other guy had a gun. Were if they were both concealed carrying they might not know of the other guy is carrying or not.

      3) I highly doubt that people with Criminal Backgrounds will open carry since it is illegal for them to own a gun it wont stop them from getting one but it sure as hell would stop them from advertising to the COP look I am breaking the Law.

      Thanks
      Robert

    6. avatar PavePusher says:

      And the open exercise of the First Amendment isn’t “necessary” in an urban environment either.

      Open carry isn’t about garnering attention, it’s about comfort and not asking government permission to use my Rights.

      Did you have an actual valid point to make?

    7. avatar Randy says:

      I don’t open carry, but I do think if more people would open carry, there would be less attention paid to people open carrying.

    8. avatar William says:

      Your opinion. Hey, if you want, I can loan you some commas.

  7. avatar Juliesa says:

    The judge and the DA are both Democrats. This is my shocked face.

  8. avatar In Memphis says:

    What a bunch of dumb@&&es. We have the choice of OC or CC here in TN, both with a permit. Your neighbors to the north arent blood soaked in case you havent noticed.

    While I do not OC very much, to anyone who is against it but is pro-gun… “Shal not be infringed” trumps your opinion.

    1. avatar Grege says:

      UT has permitless open carry and CC with a permit. 411,604 active permits in 2012 4th quarter. In 2010 we had 2,763,885 people. I feel safer in the “hoods” of Salt Lake than I ever did in NY.

  9. avatar J in MS says:

    Hinds Co(Jackson, MS) is a democrat stronghold, so seeing opposition to this isn’t surprising.

  10. avatar Dave357 says:

    This is simply unbelievable. One regularly sees laws blocked because they might infringe on someone’s Constitutional rights, even if sometimes the alleged infringment seems like a bit of a stretch. Here a law is blocked just because a judge doesn’t like it. I know talk of “judicial activism” is supposed to be some sort right-wing thing, but in this instance it is exactly what we are seeing.

    1. avatar Bob4 says:

      In Oregon, left wing judicial activism is very common. I cannot tell you how many laws in Oregon have been overturned by second rate liberal judges in the interest of the political ideology of their Democrat Party handlers. But soon, I will be moving my family and business to a free state. It is not a Colorado yet, but soon, it will be.

      1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

        It is unfortunate the direction the state has been heading in many areas. I want to return home someday, but if they decide to go full retard in the future, I will probably move south instead. The other thing is I get taxed on my retirement pay if I live there.

    2. avatar neiowa says:

      And the citizens right to redress??

      Here in Iowa we periodically to retain or can judges. Not a contested election and VERY seldom is one canned. Anyone remember in 2010 when we thru out all three Iowa Supreme Court thugs up for reelection? The leftists had a meltdown.

  11. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

    Girl in the photo has a small head or bad photoshop. My sister would love to walk her dog with a gun on her hip!

    1. avatar KCK says:

      With a wide angle lens, nearness exaggerates size. The camera was close to the dog, check his comparative size, her head is the farthest away.
      My problem is that the leash will tangle her draw.

      1. avatar In Memphis says:

        “My problem is that the leash will tangle her draw.”

        That was the hardest thing for me to adjust to in my first year of carrying. Most people complain about clothes and concealment or comfort, for me it was remembering to keep the heavy stuff out of my right hand.

        1. avatar Matt in FL says:

          I’ve read, only a couple times, about trainers who “train you to drop.” We’re conditioned to not drop things, whether they be expensive or not, or just messy if they hit the ground. It’s apparently actually a really hard thing for a lot of people to transition to fast action (drawing a weapon) if they have something in their draw hand, even if it’s not heavy like you mentioned. Even a rolled up newspaper will introduce at least a momentary hitch in your motion as your brain figures out what to do with it. So keeping your hands free is good, but let’s face it, we’re not Secret Service agents who have to deal with a semi-expected threat (or hooker) at a moment’s notice. There’s nothing wrong with using your draw hand, but be careful that your muscle memory doesn’t cause you to carefully pocket your car keys or set the coffee cup down before you draw. Drop it like it’s hot.

          http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/09/robert-farago/self-defense-tip-drop-it-like-its-hot/

      2. avatar OHgunner says:

        Yeah when I walk the dog, I always keep my draw hand free for a reason. Dog leash in the other hand isn’t that much of an inconvenience

        1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

          My dad taught me to always have my dog in the left hand on my left side. It’s from when he duck hunted, but he passed it in to me. It leaves my right hand and right side open. I still train my dogs in the same manner even if I will never take the dog hunting.

        2. avatar scottlac says:

          With CCW it takes both hands anyway. One to clear the covering garment and the other to draw. Regardless which hand the leash (or anything else) is in, it HAS to be dropped to perform a CC draw.

        3. avatar SAS 2008 says:

          “With CCW it takes both hands anyway. One to clear the covering garment and the other to draw.”

          If this is true, I recommend reconsidering how you are carrying and/or dressing. Only in a tight t-shirt with IWB carry do I need two hands to draw. Everything other way for me is a one handed draw. If you are being pounded on it is advantageous to be able to protect your head or other body parts with your weak hand/arm while drawing with your right hand. Depending on the situation it may be better to fight back some and create distance before drawing. Either way, a one handed draw opens up many more possibilities for defending yourself.

    2. avatar gemalo says:

      The judge should be more concerned that she doesn’t seem to have a baggie with which to pick up after the dog, as dog feces probably cause more health problems than a gun on the hip.

    3. avatar Mediocrates says:

      I think they photo shopped her boobs bigger. Yea, that’s the ticket.

  12. avatar Aharon says:

    Cute dog.

  13. avatar OldBenTurninginGrave says:

    It’s not shocking that this is being fought in the courts, and not shocking that the 2A side has suffered a setback here. I expect this to be overturned at a higher level. I just wonder how far the SPLC is willing to go with it.

  14. avatar Bryan says:

    From the above;
    “So while technically open carry was allowed, you’d basically have to have it on a string around your neck to avoid running afoul of the concealment law.”

    Actually under the existing law a weapon carried in such a manner was considered concealed as the side against your body could not be seen.

    The petitioners for the injunction are trying to prevent the law abiding citizenry from being able to carry a mode of self protection without having to invest in a tax on a carry permit.
    http://www.dps.state.ms.us/firearms/firearms-permit-unit/individual-permits/

    I can hear the self same individuals screaming with outrage if they had to pony up $132.00 in order to obtain a voter ID.

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      OK, so I made that part up by interpolating the statute. I was trying to come up with a way to carry it such that it was completely visible. I guess I didn’t get “completely” literal enough.

      Reminds me of a quote from Stranger in a Strange Land, by Heinlein, regarding interpolation:

      “Anne!“ Anne was seated on the springboard; she turned her head. Jubal called out, “That new house on the far hilltop — can you see what color they’ve painted it?”

      Anne looked in the direction in which Jubal was pointing and answered, “It’s white on this side.”

      1. avatar CarlosT says:

        You could keep it on a rotating stand on top of a top hat.

  15. avatar KCK says:

    Concealed Carry, OK
    Open Carry, OK (but must carried like a Viking’s horn, visible from all directions)

    Slightly Obscured Carry, Blood in the streets.

    Do politicians ever ask themselves “Is this stupid?”.

  16. avatar Max says:

    There is such a misconception that people were shooting each other all the time in the 1800’s. It’s just not true. You were far more likely to die from dysentery or an infection than by gunshot.

  17. avatar Lars says:

    Although I feel open carry is not a good idea for obvious reasons(negatively attracts law enforcement and gives advantage to criminal)but this judge’s reasoning behind why he is against it is ridiculous.

    1. avatar Voodoo Meat Bucket says:

      Open carry is often done for civil disobedience and comfort vs. self defense in regards to the element of surprise.

  18. avatar Shwiggie says:

    I live in MS. I don’t mind that they want a hearing. But these douches had six months to call for it and purposefully gave fifteen minutes notice of it to the AG. The law was to go in effect on Monday, but the hearing isn’t until the 8th.

    I’m worried that people will be carrying openly tomorrow, not knowing they are now in violation of this punk judge’s judicial malpractice.

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      Especially since Handgunlaw.us (pdf warning) still reflects the new law.

    2. avatar In Memphis says:

      Good point Shwiggie. Ignorance of the law may not be an excuse, ever but this eleventh hour bull s#!t could hurt a lot of people.

    3. avatar Pwrserge says:

      That’s actually an interesting question… Is the law invalid throughout the state or just in the judge’s jurisdiction? Legally, the court has no authority beyond the boundaries of their jurisdiction.

  19. avatar Ralph says:

    Southern Poverty Law Center? It’s sitting on about $225 million in cash. It should be called the Southern Filthy Rich Law Center.

    1. avatar dirk diggler says:

      poverty pimps led by Morris “the whore” Dees. Can’t wait for a ct of appeals ruling here that can be used for voter ID. Morris is gonna choke on this stupidity. . . . .

  20. avatar Lupy123 says:

    Blood on the streets everywhere in PA.

  21. avatar the last Marine out says:

    The Wild West was safer that,D.C. or N.Y.C. today ! crime was different take,a horse ,get hung, rob a bank get shot, a outlaw was someone on the run the it’s meaning was you had no rights until a trial, if you won you had all rights again… thus the term outlaw was outside of your bill of rights…

  22. avatar stateisevil says:

    WOW. What tyranny! This judge should be disbarred and jailed.

    The right to bear arms in this country means the right to carry openly just about everywhere without a license. There is no debate about this among educated and honest people. The law in MS clarified this.

    I also believe the there is a right to carry concealed, but the courts outside of Vermont haven’t really agreed with that. This judge in MS needs to be tarred and feathered.

  23. avatar MRROACH SIR says:

    I live in the “Wild West” and I can tell ya, guns are allowed but I have to travel 40 miles to shoot it legally.

  24. avatar Andy says:

    Well,I am from Mississippi,live close to Hattiesburg.The Democrats in both State houses,went to a Democrat judge,appointed by a Democrat former governor,and got a temporary injunction on the law,which what they did was circumvent a law that they didn’t defeat,in the legislative process.I feel that the injunction will not hold water,as what they are basing it on is,it is too vague,and is an unsafe law.As for the Southern Poverty Law Center,I have never cared for them or their leftist ideals.The new law is being subject to a lot of controversy,as a lot of local law enforcement,are speaking out against the law which is causing a knee jerk reaction by a lot of businesses,and they are putting up signs that don’t allow firearms on their premises.Also the media hasn’t helped much,what started out as trying to educate people about the new law it has taken on a somewhat like scare tactic,of the law.As far as I am concerned I am still going to carry concealed,also I have the enhanced carry,where you can carry in more places,have been through a safety class,and qualified with my firearm,but I will carry anywhere I am cleared to carry,signs or not,who will know you have it till you need to use it?I feel that these businesses with these signs might become targets of opportunity,of criminals or the mentally ill.Be prepared and ready.Keep your powder dry.

  25. avatar Mediocrates says:

    For a “circuit” court judge to thwart the legislature is laughable. Southerners have a way of dealing with this type of malfeasance.

  26. avatar William Burke says:

    Thanks, judge… for preventing any “blood running in the streets” in Jackson, Biloxi, Gulfport…

  27. avatar Ted says:

    It’s time for the supreme court to reaffirm our second amendment rights and to strike down state laws that erode our constitutional rights.

    Judges that deny citizens their constitutional rights need to be removed from the bench.

  28. avatar Nobody says:

    Wonderful story.
    Many of us “gun folks” have owned Jennings, but would never do it now.
    Learning curve, but nothing to cause shame.
    A Davis .380 (think Jennings, but without the “quality”) saved my tail a few decades ago. Even an inferior gun can save your life. I wouldn’t own one now (that’s why I like gun “buybacks”), but they can be a mistake that helps you learn.
    Fortunately, there are many gun folks now that can help us all with better choices, and I was fortunate that my poor choice still protected me.

    Again, wonderful story.

    Robert: These personal stories add a lot to this site. I hope they continue.

  29. avatar Leo Timaeus says:

    Judges and District Attorneys and Policemen are required to swear an oath to uphold the laws of Mississippi, and if they have a ‘fear’ in doing their duty, it would be better for all, if these ‘public servants’ put in their resignation and went home. I personally think a person, who works in Law, should do this to serve the People with the Law, not themselves. A person who is emotionally detach. A person who controls his anger and fear and sorrow to do what the Law as laid out. Yes, I want SUPERMAN, ruling over me; or at least aspiring to such. The Law is a hard thing, and it needs, strong, solid individuals to administer it. If these people have a problem with the LAW, passed by the PEOPLE, for the PEOPLE, please, just go home.

  30. avatar CA.Ben says:

    About that supreme court case. As always, challenges come from places that restrict rights. Here in CA, there is a lawsuit pending in the courts over open carry. Hopefully it makes it all the way to the SCOTUS.

    Check it out, and donate if you can please.

    http://blog.californiarighttocarry.org/

  31. avatar Keith M says:

    Open carry went into effect in Oklahoma in November 2012 and was the biggest non-event since Y2K.

  32. avatar Dale Drewery says:

    The AG to my knowledge says this only effects hinds county. The judge doesn’t have say in others county. And that is been the case I called around some counties allowing it others confused Joan so tell AG TOO EMAIL THE REMAINED COUNTIES .

  33. avatar Dale Drewery says:

    The AG to my knowledge says this only effects hinds county. The judge doesn’t have say in others county. And that is been the case I called around some counties allowing it others confused
    So AG needs send out emails letting departments know to allow.

  34. avatar Tom says:

    Some gun owners should take it to Jody Owens and SPLC on grounds of violating the Mississippi Constitution. The rub is that the SPLC has millions in the bank, money raised by using scare tactics. They have in the past used the faux threat of a Nazi or skinhead takeover of the government to dupe big money leftists.
    The Southern Poverty Law Center is part of the leftist statist complex. They demonize people like Pam Geller who are trying to tell the truth about Islam. The founder of SPLC Morris Dees actually called for laws banning the assembly of more than three gun owners to curb the activity of militias. Lately they have attacked mainstream conservative talk hosts like Limbaugh and Beck. And they are anti property rights. This is a dangerous organization, just as evil and bad as any neo Nazi group.

  35. avatar Mikeb302000 says:

    “Never — not in one instance ever recorded — has the liberalization of gun laws ever led to an increase in crime in the manner in which it’s always predicted by the gun grabbing community. ”

    Nick, I can’t believe you wrote such a thing, which of course, went unchallenged by your sycophantic commenters.

    Every single day there are many stories in the news of hidden criminals or formerly law-abiding gun owners doing wrong shit with guns. These are the direct result of the lax gun control laws, or, I should say, the shabby mish-mash we have that passes for gun control.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email