In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Missouri S. Court rules CCW constitutional
beantole
Member Posts: 1,086 ✭✭✭✭
OK, I just read the entire decision of the Missoui Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the CCW law passed by our legislature. The good news is they held almost unanimously that it is legal to have conceal carry in Missouri. The bad news is that they ruled the $38. fee the county would have to pay the state police for each background/fingerprintcheck is an unfunded mandate. Under the law, as it was passed, none of the $100. application fee can be used to pay the state police for the background check. The GOOD news is that the court specifically ruled the part of the law allowing any law-abiding citizen 21 years of age or over to carry concealed in their car WITHOUT any license or permit is OK. Bottom line.........the law will have to be re-written to allow $38. of the application fee to be used to pay the state police for the background check but until then you can carry open or concealed in your car.
Bruce
Bruce
Comments
T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
To whom much is given, much is expected.
http://www.osca.state.mo.us/Courts/PubOpinions.nsf/0f87ea4ac0ad4c0186256405005d3b8e/b14dae00e29160d186256e4600666f47?OpenDocument
The way I see it is this:
It is now legal to carry concealed in your vehicle anywhere in the state (where it wasn't before).
The part of the law allowing you to apply for and receive a concealed carry permit cannot be enforced in Camden, Cape Girardeau, Greene and Jackson counties because it has been demonstrated to constitute an unfunded mandate under the Handcock amendment.
The part of the law allowing you to apply for and receive a concealed carry permit may be enforced in all other counties, but ANY citizen can prevent enforcement by bringing a lawsuit showing that the law constitutes an unfunded mandate.
The decision may leave it up to the county to decide if it will enforce that part of the law, but I'm not sure on this.
THIS IS CONFUSING - JUST TELL US IF IT'S LEGAL OR NOT - DON'T CONFUSE US. I WISH I HAD A ROBE OR A POLITICAL OFFICE SO I COULD FALL IN LOVE WITH THE SOUND OF MY OWN VOICE.
To whom much is given, much is expected.
This sentence constitutes a nightmare -- can you imagine your neighbor suing over your CCW just because they're anti-gun? I can. With "unfunded mandate" as an EXCUSE, not a reason.
T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
Pretty good, I guess. At least they are trying. I can't recall whether Michigan and Indiana have reciprocity on this; is my Indiana CCW honored up there?
T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
There is currently no reciprocity agreement between Michigan and Missouri.
G36
Gun Control Disarms Victims, NOT CriminalsThe 2nd Amendment; America's Original Homeland Security
Note that the supreme court ruled it unfunded in all four counties for which evidence was presented on this point, so it is going to be an easy showing for the liberals that WILL (and oh they will) bring suit.
I wouldn't want to be the person bringing suit in some parts of the state though, especially in the rural areas where your neighbor might not appreciate the fact that you just brought a suit to prevent him from exercising his right to keep and bear arms.
To whom much is given, much is expected.
Bruce
"You cannot conquer America." -William Pitt, 1777