Texas: Another Bogus Open Carry "Disorderly Conduct" Arrest

Gun Watch ^ | 27 January, 2014 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Michael Keoughan was exercising his right to bear arms in Texas last Wednesday (22 January).  He is part of a Texas group of second amendment supporters that demonstrate that the second amendment means something by legally carrying rifles slung across their back.   They openly state that they are educating people about their rights under the Texas and Federal Constitutions.

Before the Civil War (or War Between the States), Texas had a strong right to keep and bear arms clause in its constitution.  After the Confederacy lost the war, the reconstruction government created a new Texas constitution.  The new Texas constitution had a "soviet style" right to keep and bear arms.  That is, they listed the right, but made it irrelevant by saying that the legislature could ignore it when they thought they needed to stop crime.   The reconstruction legislature immediately made the bearing of arms illegal.

When the reconstruction government was kicked out, a new constitution was written and passed.  It reinstated the right to keep and bear arms, but failed to completely remove the legislature's ability to modify it.   They left in a phrase saying that the legislature could regulate the "wearing" of arms.  The legislature never removed the reconstruction ban on wearing pistols or large knives.

That is why the right of Texans to openly carry rifles and shotguns is protected by the constitution, but open carry of pistols and large knives is not.

Come and Take It, the second amendment group that Mr. Keoughan belongs to, aims to restore the right to openly carry pistols and other weapons to Texans.  It has held numerous open carry demonstrations around Texas, and is in the process of planning another for Andrews.    Mr. Keoughan was checking out the rout of their rally when he was arrested for openly carrying his rifle strapped to his back.   This is the second time that an Come And Take It member was arrested in Andrews for open carry.  The Police chief, Jones, was notified that the rally would be taking place, and still says that he will support it.

The ruse that the police used to arrest Mr. Keoughan was "disorderly conduct".  There is a provision in Texas law that defines disorderly conduct with a weapon as: 

“DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly…(8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm.”

The problem for the police is that Mr. Keoughan and Come and Take It adamatly state that their actions are not "calculated to alarm" but are meant to educate.    It is difficult to argue their point when the vast majority of people that they meet on the street are not alarmed.  From newswest9.com:

"I had great interactions throughout the entire day until the police showed up," Keoughan said.

  Police Chief Jones disagrees:

"We didn't know who he was, had no clue but we started getting a mass number of phone calls," Chief Jones said. "By displaying the weapon, he caused undue alarm."

Some people were alarmed.  We do not know how many, or how alarmed, because from past experience with these events, the calls are often an inquiry asking if the open carry is legal, which is exactly the sort of education Come And Take It is attempting to achieve.

The Chief is wrong to presume that causing alarm is the same as "calculated to alarm".   If merely "causing alarm" were sufficient to arrest, then the entire constitutional guarantee of bearing arms in Texas could be voided by anyone claiming that they were "alarmed" by seeing someone bearing arms.

The quote in newswest9.com may be taken out of context, but he seems to imply that checking someone out is the same as arresting them:

"This is the issue that they don't want to address that we have to address," Chief Jones said. "When we get a call about a person with a gun, do we ignore it? Walking down the street? They're alluding to the fact that we don't have any right to make contact to them because they're not doing anything wrong. I beg to differ with them."

 No one is saying that the police cannot drive by someone that a citizen finds suspicious, or talk to them.   Police know that criminals almost never openly carry guns, and that those who are working to restore second amendment rights often do.   We can contrast what happened in Andrews with what recently happened in Fond du Lac Wisconsin:

“It was basically just a unique display of (the gun owners’) right to bear arms under the state’s open carry law and the U.S. Constitution,” Meyer said. “In a similar incident in Appleton, police engaged the individuals and caused additional turmoil. Our police observed them, making sure that they weren’t a threat to public safety.”

 It is difficult to square Chief Jones assurance that he supports the First, second,fourth and fifth amendments, with Mr. Keoughan's arrest:

 "I can't emphasize enough that we support their right," he said.

The police, after determining that Mr. Keoughan was exercising his rights, did not have to arrest him.   In fact, it appears that they arrested him without legal cause to do so.

The leading candidate for Governor,  Greg Abbot, has said that he supports legalizing open carry of handguns in Texas.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

Second Amendment fought this battle over bogus "disorderly conduct" charges in Wisconsin and Michigan, and won.

[rktman]

Well once wendy davis gets elected governor we’ll put a stop to all those kind of awkward arrests. (She says she owns a pistol.) Right? Right?

[marktwain]

Wendy Davis is getting hammered by revelations about her life right now. I wonder if she will even get the nomination. It would be interesting if conservatives will knock her out of the race before she is even nominated, as the “progressives” did to man conservative candidates in 2012.

[Ancient Man]

Her girlfriends attest that “Windy’s” a cunning linguist.

[marktwain]

“man conservative” should be “many conservative”.

[deoetdoctrinae]

The Chief is wrong to presume that causing alarm is the same as "calculated to alarm".

Precisely! If intent is ignored, and the fear exhibited by an un-informed public is the only requirement, the right has been neutered.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Where’s the NRA lawyer ?

[ontap]

We in Texas are actively confronting and winning over many in law enforcement. Most of these charges are later either dropped or thrown out of court. With the exception of some liberal enclaves district attorneys don’t want the hassle and political ramifications of being on the wrong side of this. Greg Abbott the most likely next governor campaigns for open carry of handguns as well!!

[rktman]

Well now, that would just prove that the “conservatives” are indeed waging a war against women. LOL! She needs to be booted. But, she’s just doing what demokkkrats do with, more than likely, no damage done. I mean, who would ever have thought that someone could get elected after they admittedly used weed and cocaine? Just the mere implication that GW “might” have been associated with it almost cost him the nomination. Maybe “they” just gain street creds for admitting their failings. Weird, I know.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

I am absolutely amazed at the fact that the right to carry crowd fails to profit by the American towns of Deadwood, Dodge City, Wichita, Bodie, Abilene and Tombstone. They all were "Open Carry" and it worked so well that the people of those days were the ones who passed laws controlling the bearing of arms.

I can just see everybody carrying arms. Remember everybody includes "Ole Hoss" in the bar drunk as hell brandishing his two .44 magnums. He then fires in his alcoholic state and the bullet passes through the bar wall killing ten year old Susie walking by the bar on her way home from school.

Further, in the days of Dodge City there was a greater chance that the people involved in an "Open Carry" situation knew or were at least acquainted with each other. Today is very anonymous and there would be no moderating factor of personal knowledge.(Which did not stop the carnage resulting from "Open Carry."

Well regulated carry, with permits, no guns in bars even if have a permit, guns ok in ones house or place of business. Even to get a permit to carry one must show good cause such as carrying large sums of money, drugs etc. When going hunting or target shooting the gun is placed in the trunk and the ammo in the glove box. All the aforementioned are sane rules.

I'm glad the cops arrested the turkey in the photo. He is an idiot and should not even be allowed to have a gun. Unrestricted carrying is a bad policy.

By the way I have owned guns hunted and gone target shooting since the early 1950's. I support the Second Amendment

[Dead Corpse]

Irrelevemt what the State Constitution says. Once a State joins the Union, “shall not be infringed” applies via “laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding” and “privileges and immunities”.

Past due time for the Courts to remember this.

[Dead Corpse]

What a contorted way to admit you approve of gun control...

[Rannug]

“Her girlfriends attest that “Windy’s” a cunning linguist.”

LMAO at that one.

[Hot Tabasco]

Even to get a permit to carry one must show good cause such as carrying large sums of money

Not in a "shall issue" state, which most states are..........I don't think you really know gun laws at all and to say you support the 2nd Amendment is laughable.

[Hot Tabasco]

Unrestricted carrying is a bad policy.

More hogwash.....Michigan is an open carry state and there has never been a shooting as a result of our right........

[Chasaway]

Contrary to your statement, you do NOT support the 2nd Amendment.

You support infringements upon the right of free people to keep and bear arms. You support RULES and MODIFICATIONS to the 2nd Amendment.

C

[MileHi]

Even to get a permit to carry one must show good cause such as carrying large sums of money, drugs etc. When going hunting or target shooting the gun is placed in the trunk and the ammo in the glove box. All the aforementioned are sane rules.

Common sense gun control, in other words? You know where you shove that drivel I assume.

[T-Bird45]

Sorry, you’re just another Zumbo-Fudd without a clue on the meaning of “shall not be infringed” while trying to create an excuse for government control over natural rights.

[JimRed]

I support the Second Amendment

With all due respect, it does not sound like you do so. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you fail to understand? I think you've bought in to the leftist drivel about firearms; the constant repetition may have programmed your thinking.

[ConstantSkeptic]

What. An. Idiot.

I hope the police hassle fools like this every time they do something so stupid. Yes, it may be legal to openly carry a gun. But for the residents of the area, they have no idea if this maybe crazy fool is legally carrying or not. Their first responsibility is to their family, to their children. You better believe that I would be calling 911 if I saw some stranger strutting down my street prominently displaying a firearm.

As my mom taught me: Just because you CAN do something doesn’t mean that you SHOULD do something.

Too bad police can’t give tickets for being stupid because that’s what this idiot should have been ticketed for.