Missouri Right to Carry, part 2

MudChild · Post by **MudChild** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 4:20 pm

I posted on this forum a while back about the Missouri legistature over-riding our dear, good governor's veto of the right to carry law. It was challenged in court and was finally struck down on Fri. Our great and wise governor was tickled pick that a judge slapped our Republican legislature in the face, but a lawyer from the NRA has got it moved on to a higher court. Let's hope that there is a judge somewhere in Missouri who can reason.

P.S. All remarks regarding the greatness of Governor Bob Holden were meant as sarcastic.

Texas Shooter · Post by **Texas Shooter** » Sun Nov 09, 2003 7:21 pm

We had our trials with the wonderful and lovely Ann Richards.

Finally, George W. passed the bill for us.

BTW: My comments about Ann Richards are Sarcastic as well.

Stay with it.

Texas Shooter

Lee Stone · Post by **Lee Stone** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 1:13 pm

Good luck to all of y'all up there. Hopefully A higher court will reverse that decision. But,

In reading some on the Missouri situation it seems I recall reading that there is a stipulation in the Missouri State Constitution prohibiting concealed carry of weapons. If I did read that correctly and there is such a stipulation in y'all's constituion, then you may well be up against it. I don't believe a law can be passed that goes directly against a state's constitution. It would take a constitutional ammendment in that case. I sure hope I read that wrong and that there is no constitutional prohibition against concealed carry in your state.

MudChild · Post by **MudChild** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 5:26 pm

Sadly, there is. An amendment, passed in 1875 I believe, prohibited the carry of concealed weapons. I've read somewhere, though, that the amenment somehow works in our favor. I'm not real sure, but I think it was something about the amendment not being specific enough about the type of weapon. Please don't qoute me, I have a..uh..active mind and forget some things quickly. (Distracted by pictures in a gun magazine.) Anyway, we have a Republican legislature, and as soon as the next election comes around, maybe a Republican governor.

Another point of the liberals was that the populace had voted the right to carry down before, which is true. The issue was put to vote after the unfortunate event at Columbine.

BuckeyeShooter · Post by **BuckeyeShooter** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 7:20 pm

The republican govenor and legislature here in Ohio are the anti gun group. Some on the other side of the aisle are our biggest supporters. Being a conservative and a republican I can't tell you how disappointed I am in the republican politicians here in Ohio.

8iowa · Post by **8iowa** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 9:04 pm

When I drive from S.W. Florida to the U.P. of Michigan my FL concealed weapon permit is valid for all of the trip except for a 20 mile section on I275 around Cincinnati going towards Indiana. All other states on my route have passed concealed weapons reciprocal laws. I think Wisconsin is close, but it will be an uphill battle in Illinois and Ohio. Get involved and most especially - vote!

I was a member of the Florida House of Representatives when we passed our law making us recripocal with other states. I remember a very liberal member from West Palm beach standing up and complaining about more guns, more crime, ect. I interrupted her with the statement that holders of these permits were those who have underground background checks and fingerprinting; that as a group, holders of these permits have a crime rate that is so low that it doesn't even stastically compute. This was one of the few times that she ever sat down quietly. She is now the mayor of West Palm Beach - go figure.

MudChild · Post by **MudChild** » Mon Nov 10, 2003 9:31 pm

Buckeyeshooter:

Republicans like your governor are exactly the reason I don't punch straight ticket. That and I'm opposed to the idea of voting for a party over an individual. Is he at least anti-abortion?

8iowa:
I almost can't believe that a liberal would sit down and shut up like that. My experience is that they don't care enough about reason to even listen. Of course, why should they? If they did, they would lose the votes of all those from my generation who think making a difference means being "different." Common sense is on the endangered list.

8iowa · Post by **8iowa** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 10:39 am

Mudchild: It's always a good idea to check out a candidate's background and then vote in the primary. This is the only way to keep RINO's out of office. One usual sign is that the Trial Lawyers usually back these candidates. In the case of my former colegue from W. Palm Beach, she had made her point with the only constitutents that she cared about and saved her breath for other issues where the vote was closer.

Timberlake · Post by **Timberlake** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 6:23 pm

Mudchild,

The really good people of Missouri want the RTC law. Some folks from St Louis and KC and Springfield and other large cities don't want it. Sadly, populated centers are not too fond of it and that is where it's needed the most.

Here in Iowa, we do not have that right, but I think it won't be long before we do. Our two term governor, Tom Vilsack (D) won't support it. He supports more illegals coming into the state (more votes), not more firearms. He won't get more votes and will be done next time around. We ALL need to keep an eye on Vilsack, he's posturing for the presidency.

However, you good folks down there need to keep up the good fight and make RTC happen. Mr Holden will not prevail! In a few years I'll be some of your voting stock.

TL

Canoe112 · Post by **Canoe112** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 6:48 pm

I note the various States that all of you have written from. I am concerned about any infringements of your rights that are affecting you and your fellow States citizens.

But in truth, I envy you.

My family has been in California since 1912. Most of us are still in the same town.

The gun restrictions have grown so strong in California that I was required to register all handguns I owned, even those I inherited or purchased well prior to the law being enacted.

It has gotten to the point that I am barely able to walk into a gun shop and find anything that interests me.

A new law was just passed. In 3 years all handguns must have an indicator which shows if the weapon is chambered.

At that point the my beloved and venerable 1911 A1 Pistols will not be permitted.

The pistol my father landed with on D Day +2 through the Battle of the Bulge will not be legal in his own home town.

I often eat breakfast with my friend Mo at 5:30 am at McDonald's. Mo is quite guy and is older than I am. Mo landed at D Day - (Yeah, BEFORE D Day.) Mo was in Bastogne when it was encircled by the Nazis during the Bulge. He is WW II vintage 82nd Airborne. Mo won't be permited to buy a 1911 A 1 in his home town.

(Yeah, Mo is competent to still own weapons. We eat at 5:30, because Mo has to begin training at the YMCA at 7:00 am. He trains each day for 3 hours.)

BEWARE, the elimination of civillain ownership of weapons has begun. It is where I live. Outside groups are pouring money into this State in order to place tighter and tighter controls on weapons. We are their test case.

We need help from all of you.

Or, the Cancer in my State will ultimately spread to yours.

Hal

MudChild · Post by **MudChild** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 7:13 pm

I thought Terminator was pro-gun.
If it were not for the folks in California like you, I'd be more than happy for them to secede from the Union. There's a lot of pretty country out there, and my family hails from there (sort of) but most of the liberal stuff starts there. People used to say that when Europe sneezed, the world caught a cold. I'm afraid the same thing could be said about California and the U.S.

Canoe112 · Post by **Canoe112** » Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:04 pm

MudChild,

The "Governator" is not pro gun as I define it.

Regardless, the Governor is not the problem. The problem is the Legislature. The State is "carved up" to ensure Democratic liberal victory in almost all geographic areas. But not all.

Tom McClintock the true pro gun candidate in the Governor's race currently represents my District. He's the guy I voted for in the last Governor's election. If you look at the results you will note that a lot of us did. Tom is the candidate the Rebuplican party should have backed.

I got tell you.

The "Fruits and Nuts" of California are generally not the old Families of this State. The Families that established the Ranches or held the Spanish land grants. (My family married into a Spanish land grant Family in the old days. The Canyons behind my town still bear the names of that land grant Family.)

The "Fruits and Nuts" tend to be recent imports drawn from all over our Nation. They come because of San Francisco or LA / Hollywood. Why the SOBs come here I don't know. The stupid TV tells them "Its Cool".

I hate all large cities regardless of State or Nation. I detest LA and for years had a sign near the entrance to my county that said, "LA Go Home."

We are losing that battle and in a few more years this town that I through marriage am related to since the days of the Chumash shall be gone.

North of me is open range all the way until the Bay Area. It is primarily all cattle country with some recent vineyards here and there.

In the Valley behind me is a hand carved rock. It commemorates the passage of Captain John C Fremont ("The Pathfinder") from that Valley into Santa Barbara. Fremont defeated the Mexican Army and claimed Santa Barbara for the United States. I spend much of my time in the area around Yosemite. That large area, shared by three counties, was once John C Fremont's Ranch.

Go to Santa Maria or Shannon or even Bakersfield. You'll feel right at home. I can give the names of one hundred more places.

I don't judge your State based on stereotype. Probably best not to judge mine based on stereotype.

We're all just American "gun guys", regardless of State or North or South.

As far as "catching a cold". You are correct. That is my exact point.

It is not in any of our interests, if California continues to "sneeze" on the weapons issue.

The national liberals are using California as their "test case". They are pouring national anti gun money into my State.

If they win, California will "SNEEZE". And, you all will eventually catch a cold.

Hal

Maj Bob Lee · Post by **Maj Bob Lee** » Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:14 am

Actually what the Missouri Constitution says in Article 1 Section 23 is "That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons." This was meant to mean that a citizen could not arbitrarily carr y concealed but did not prohibit the elected representatives of the people in the form of the legislature from passing laws outlining a procedure for licensing and regulating concealed carry. As it is right now law enforcement officers and officers of the courts and all judges can carry concealed because of laws passed by the legislature. If the judge's current ruling is allowed to stand then the legislature had no right to pass laws allowing this and they cannot carry concealed either. You just have to love the liberals!!

Lee Stone · Post by **Lee Stone** » Wed Nov 12, 2003 7:47 am

The quotation from the Missouri Constitution just made by Maj. Bob Lee, does not prohibit concealed carry. All it does is say that it is not an automatic right. So once again it looks like a case of a liberal judge making his own law according to his own opinions. The quotation just submitted is very straight forward and easy to understand. It had to be twisted to justify the ruling of that district judge. Hopely the higher court will have some real judges sitting, rather than some wannabe lawmaker judges.

Maj Bob Lee · Post by **Maj Bob Lee** » Wed Nov 12, 2003 6:14 pm

Yep, Lee you are exactly right as I see it, and most everyone else outside of the hardcore liberal left. The St Louis Post Dispatch, a newspaper that can only be classified as very left leaning and who has very definitely championed the anti concealed carry initiative in Missouri, published an editorial critical of judge Steven Ohmer's decision saying that the Missouri Constitution does NOT prohibit the legislature from passing a law allowing concealed carry. even though they characterize it as a path leading to Hell. They still say it is perfectly leagle for the legislature to pass this law. Unfortunetly for the last eleven years the state has elected liberal democrat governors. Mel Carnahan, and now Holden, both of whom appointed judges to the Missouri Supreme Court. Carnahan and Holden were and are both rabidly anti-concealed carry and for the most part anti-2nd Amendment. (Thank you Saint Louis and Kansas City!). Four of the seven justices on the Missouri Supreme Court are Carnahan or Holden appointiees. The other three were appointed by John Ashcroft, That's right the same "evil villain" who is now Attorney General of the United States. He served as Attorney General for 2 terms and as Governor of the State for 2 terms and then as US Senator for Missouri for 6 years before becoming Attorney General. In this state he was known for being very straight laced but absoutely honest and absolutely NOT a killer of the US or Missouri Constitutions.