Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Missouri representatives introduce armed teachers bill.

  1. #1
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279

    Missouri representatives introduce armed teachers bill.

    Kudos to Representative Kelley who "gets it" and understands the need for teachers to have the ability to protect their students.

    http://www.kbia.org/post/missouri-la...armed-teachers

    This will obviously result in the inevitable comments about the dangers of cowboy vigilante teachers wounding children with stray bullets loosed in a hail of gunfire.

    Whenever I encounter these comments in discussions, I always reply with my typical acidic sarcasm, "Oh yeah. We don't want teachers shooting back. They could inadvertantly graze someone with an accidental miss......

    ...Much better to let a lunatic intentionally shoot them in the head until everyone in the room is dead. That's a preferable alternative."

  2. #2
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    I may be misunderstanding the statute, however it does not appear that it is unlawful to carry a concealed firearm on school property, even inside the building.

    571.030 - Unlawful use of weapons--exceptions--penalties.

    1. A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly:

    (10) Carries a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any school, onto any school bus, or onto the premises of any function or activity sponsored or sanctioned by school officials or the district school board.

    4. Subdivisions (1), (8), and (10) of subsection 1 of this section shall not apply to any person who has a valid concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121 or a valid permit or endorsement to carry concealed firearms issued by another state or political subdivision of another state.

    5. Subdivisions (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), and (10) of subsection 1 of this section shall not apply to persons who are engaged in a lawful act of defense pursuant to section 563.031.

    571.107. - Endorsement does not authorize concealed firearms, where--penalty for violation.

    1. A concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121.....

    (10) Any higher education institution or elementary or secondary school facility without the consent of the governing body of the higher education institution or a school official or the district school board. Possession of a firearm in a vehicle on the premises of any higher education institution or elementary or secondary school facility shall not be a criminal offense so long as the firearm is not removed from the vehicle or brandished while the vehicle is on the premises;

    563.031 - Use of force in defense of persons. http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000031.HTM
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I may be misunderstanding the statute, however it does not appear that it is unlawful to carry a concealed firearm on school property, even inside the building.
    I remember noticing this myself. Was that taken from the Missouri statutes or a local municipality? Anyone else know anything about this?

  4. #4
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I may be misunderstanding the statute, however it does not appear that it is unlawful to carry a concealed firearm on school property, even inside the building.
    IIRC, this is where the gray area comes into play....the FED GFSZ and the state CCW. You are correct from the state side, it isn't unlawful....however, there is much debate as to whether the fed GFSZ is still in place. I haven't seen any court cases that give a leaning one way or another. I would like to see clarification on this issue and if they have a proposed law to clarify it, that would be better.
    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  5. #5
    Regular Member HP995's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    MO, USA
    Posts
    289
    But the school officials might be anti-gun, so the teacher couldn't get permission. Definitely the law needs changing so that schools (and churches, etc) are not target zones, and teachers or other employees (and visitors, church worshippers, whatever) could carry weapons there legally if they can carry legally elsewhere.

    Schools could still put up no weapon signs if they want, but it would be a standard CCW situation where violation is not a huge deal.

    And...maybe OC for teachers would help with unruly classroom behavior. Just kidding.

    I agree with Ann Coulter's column that CCW is perfect for places like churches and schools.

    I also believe in OC everywhere. It would be good to have a mixture of OC and CCW in places that get targeted. That way if a postal person sees an obvious guard or armed citizen and picks him off, the CCW people can still respond.

    That's a tactical consideration...but my personal belief is OC, and I think if enough people OC, the perp won't try to hit the school or church in the first place. So we really need to change those laws to take such places off the "no carry" list. If they don't look so soft, cowards will steer clear.

  6. #6
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    IIRC, this is where the gray area comes into play....the FED GFSZ and the state CCW. You are correct from the state side, it isn't unlawful....however, there is much debate as to whether the fed GFSZ is still in place. I haven't seen any court cases that give a leaning one way or another. I would like to see clarification on this issue and if they have a proposed law to clarify it, that would be better.
    Well.....

    18 USC § 922 Unlawful acts (q)

    (2)(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

    (2)(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—

    (2)(B)(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;
    Seems pretty clear to me.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  7. #7
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    Finally:

    571.107.2. Carrying of a concealed firearm in a location specified in subdivisions (1) to (17) of subsection 1 of this section by any individual who holds a concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121 shall not be a criminal act but may subject the person to denial to the premises or removal from the premises.
    Cops don't like LACs being lawfully armed in a school, or on school grounds. Sadly, even before last Friday, you will get cuffed and stuffed. I assure you that there is not a single cop that will know that being a CCW holder and being on school grounds is not unlawful until you refuse to leave.

    I think that I will pass along this information to my local school board and my kid's school(s).

    I'll get back to you if they respond.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    IIRC, this is where the gray area comes into play....the FED GFSZ and the state CCW. You are correct from the state side, it isn't unlawful....however, there is much debate as to whether the fed GFSZ is still in place. I haven't seen any court cases that give a leaning one way or another. I would like to see clarification on this issue and if they have a proposed law to clarify it, that would be better.
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Well.....

    Seems pretty clear to me.
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Finally:

    Cops don't like LACs being lawfully armed in a school, or on school grounds. Sadly, even before last Friday, you will get cuffed and stuffed. I assure you that there is not a single cop that will know that being a CCW holder and being on school grounds is not unlawful until you refuse to leave.

    I think that I will pass along this information to my local school board and my kid's school(s).

    I'll get back to you if they respond.
    Thanks for your help guys!

  9. #9
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    Well, not finally, but finally now:

    Wentzville City Code:

    SECTION 210.250: WEAPONS -- CARRYING CONCEALED -- OTHER UNLAWFUL USE

    A. A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons if he/she knowingly:

    7. Carries a firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any school, onto any school bus, or onto the premises of any function or activity sponsored or sanctioned by school officials or the district school board.

    D. Subparagraphs (1), (6) and (7) of Subsection (A) of this Section shall not apply to any person who has a valid concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to Sections 571.101 to 571.121, RSMo., or a valid permit or endorsement to carry concealed firearms issued by another State or political subdivision of another State.

    E. Subparagraphs (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7) of Subsection (A) of this Section shall not apply to persons who are engaged in a lawful act of defense pursuant to Section 563.031, RSMo.
    Hmm.....
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Well, not finally, but finally now:

    Hmm.....
    Good to know. Thanks!

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    St Louis, Mo
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    I may be misunderstanding the statute, however it does not appear that it is unlawful to carry a concealed firearm on school property, even inside the building.
    You are correct, as you pointed out in a later post.

    That said, as it stands, the school can and will fire said teacher (or faculty) if they get even a hint that they MIGHT have a firearm.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Well.....
    18 USC § 922 Unlawful acts (q)

    (2)(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

    (2)(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—

    (2)(B)(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;
    Seems pretty clear to me.
    That little word 'license' is the one that causes the most conversation. CCWs are permits/endorsements, not a license, or so the discussions have gone.

    I don't know the answer, but I have several discussions that reach no positive conclusion. There have a been a couple of cases that reference this, but I am not able to recall them.

    Bottom line....carry on school grounds and get noticed...you will draw attention and have to do some explaining. I will promise if you refuse or provide resistance, your pocket book will need to be opened to fight the battle. It's anecdotal, but most (95%) of the administrative educators I know, are anti-gun. They would love to use a LAC to promote their anti-gun agenda.

    I spoke with a teacher last night who allowed their CCW to expire three years ago, they are getting it in January. When employed in Atlanta, they carried one everyday to class. They have said they will carry, permission or not. We'll see what happens.
    Last edited by Redbaron007; 12-20-2012 at 04:39 PM.
    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    That little word 'license' is the one that causes the most conversation. CCWs are permits/endorsements, not a license, or so the discussions have gone.

    I don't know the answer, but I have several discussions that reach no positive conclusion. There have a been a couple of cases that reference this, but I am not able to recall them.

    Bottom line....carry on school grounds and get noticed...you will draw attention and have to do some explaining. I will promise if you refuse or provide resistance, your pocket book will need to be opened to fight the battle. It's anecdotal, but most (95%) of the administrative educators are anti-gun. They would love to use a LAC to promote their anti-gun agenda.

    I spoke with a teacher last night who allowed their CCW to expire three years ago, they are getting it in January. When employed in Atlanta, they carried one everyday to class. They have said they will carry, permission or not. We'll see what happens.
    Very interesting. Anyone else have a take on this?

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    ...This will obviously result in the inevitable comments about the dangers of cowboy vigilante teachers wounding children with stray bullets loosed in a hail of gunfire...
    And even if this were a possibility, it is still better than a government-mandated massacre because return fire was outlawed.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Rolla, MO
    Posts
    39
    Take this as you will, but this is from the Attorney General's office. I emailed asking basically this question last year.


    ME:
    If I have a valid Missouri concealed carry permit, according to RSMO 571.107.2, all previous sections of RSMO 571.107.1 sections 1-17 will not be a criminal act, but civil. This would include carrying on elementary schools, College, churches, hospitals, etc. Is this correct? I understand that if for some reason they realized that I was carrying, I would be asked to leave, and if I refused, would then become liable under 571.107.2.The following are links to these statutes.

    http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5710000107.HTM

    2. Carrying of a concealed firearm in a location specified in subdivisions (1) to (17) of subsection 1 of this section by any individual who holds a concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121 shall not be a criminal act but may subject the person to denial to the premises or removal from the premises.



    Dear Mr. [redacted]

    Thank you for your inquiry. Attorney General Koster has asked that I respond.

    Section 571.107 provides that even with a ccw, the permit holder is not authorized to carry concealed weapons into the places mentioned from Sections 571.107.1(1) to (17). If a permit holder enters any of these places, he may be denied entry or removed. The statute specifies that this is not a criminal act. However, if the permit holder refuses to leave, Section 571.101.2 provides for citations and fines upon subsequent violations. Section 571.101.2 further contemplates charges arising from the citation:

    Upon conviction of charges arising from a citation issued pursuant to this subsection, the court shall notify the sheriff of the county which issued the certificate of qualification for a concealed carry endorsement and the department of revenue.

    If we may be of any further assistance, please let me know.

    Sincerely,


    Joseph Schlotzhauer
    Assistant Attorney General

    Division of Public Safety
    Missouri Attorney General's Office

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by NeoShade View Post
    Take this as you will, but this is from the Attorney General's office. I emailed asking basically this question last year.


    ME:
    If I have a valid Missouri concealed carry permit, according to RSMO 571.107.2, all previous sections of RSMO 571.107.1 sections 1-17 will not be a criminal act, but civil. This would include carrying on elementary schools, College, churches, hospitals, etc. Is this correct? I understand that if for some reason they realized that I was carrying, I would be asked to leave, and if I refused, would then become liable under 571.107.2.The following are links to these statutes.

    http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5710000107.HTM

    2. Carrying of a concealed firearm in a location specified in subdivisions (1) to (17) of subsection 1 of this section by any individual who holds a concealed carry endorsement issued pursuant to sections 571.101 to 571.121 shall not be a criminal act but may subject the person to denial to the premises or removal from the premises.



    Dear Mr. [redacted]

    Thank you for your inquiry. Attorney General Koster has asked that I respond.

    Section 571.107 provides that even with a ccw, the permit holder is not authorized to carry concealed weapons into the places mentioned from Sections 571.107.1(1) to (17). If a permit holder enters any of these places, he may be denied entry or removed. The statute specifies that this is not a criminal act. However, if the permit holder refuses to leave, Section 571.101.2 provides for citations and fines upon subsequent violations. Section 571.101.2 further contemplates charges arising from the citation:

    Upon conviction of charges arising from a citation issued pursuant to this subsection, the court shall notify the sheriff of the county which issued the certificate of qualification for a concealed carry endorsement and the department of revenue.

    If we may be of any further assistance, please let me know.

    Sincerely,


    Joseph Schlotzhauer
    Assistant Attorney General

    Division of Public Safety
    Missouri Attorney General's Office
    Awesome! Thanks for the clarification!

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Rolla, MO
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by Right2BearFTW View Post
    Awesome! Thanks for the clarification!
    I'm not a lawyer, so don't take my post as Gospel, but the law seems simple enough to me. The only problem is that 95% of LEO will still tackle/shoot/jail you because they don't know the laws well enough. Then you will have to fight it in court, spend money on your defense, and luckily would win and could set precedence. After Sandy Hook though, who knows who would shoot you. Maybe even a scared teacher/parent.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by NeoShade View Post
    I'm not a lawyer, so don't take my post as Gospel, but the law seems simple enough to me. The only problem is that 95% of LEO will still tackle/shoot/jail you because they don't know the laws well enough. Then you will have to fight it in court, spend money on your defense, and luckily would win and could set precedence. After Sandy Hook though, who knows who would shoot you. Maybe even a scared teacher/parent.
    Thanks! I wasn't planning on carrying on school grounds or anything like that anyway. I was just curious on what was actually allowed legally.

  19. #19
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    Quote Originally Posted by NeoShade View Post
    <snip> Dear Mr. [redacted]

    Thank you for your inquiry. Attorney General Koster has asked that I respond.

    Section 571.107 provides that even with a ccw, the permit holder is not authorized to carry concealed weapons into the places mentioned from Sections 571.107.1(1) to (17). If a permit holder enters any of these places, he may be denied entry or removed. The statute specifies that this is not a criminal act. However, if the permit holder refuses to leave, Section 571.101.2 provides for citations and fines upon subsequent violations. Section 571.101.2 further contemplates charges arising from the citation:

    Upon conviction of charges arising from a citation issued pursuant to this subsection, the court shall notify the sheriff of the county which issued the certificate of qualification for a concealed carry endorsement and the department of revenue.

    If we may be of any further assistance, please let me know.

    Sincerely,

    Joseph Schlotzhauer
    Assistant Attorney General

    Division of Public Safety
    Missouri Attorney General's Office
    The AAG did not answer the question, he bolded what we can clearly read for ourselves. Send him a reply that points out the "may" in the text he apparently bolded above. Have him provide a "opinion" on what that term means AND when does that term come into play.

    If the principle, for a lack of a more accurate term, authorizes you to carry, in writing, with your endorsement on school property, have the AAG explain what the implications are if you get permission to carry on school property in writing. What should/would the AG expect local LE to do if a local LEO is confronted with your "permission slip" from the principle.

    Also, ask the AAG if a trespass charge for failing to leave will be lodged and will a charge for "a gun crime" be added to the mix beyond the "citation" identified in the statute for failing to leave.

    In my opinion the AAG did not address the premise of your question. Let us know what the "AG" says via his AAG.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  20. #20
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    Quote Originally Posted by NeoShade View Post
    <snip> After Sandy Hook though, who knows who would shoot you. Maybe even a scared teacher/parent.
    Now, how on earth could that happen? Guns ain't allowed in school.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  21. #21
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    Kudos to Representative Kelley who "gets it" and understands the need for teachers to have the ability to protect their students.

    http://www.kbia.org/post/missouri-la...armed-teachers

    This will obviously result in the inevitable comments about the dangers of cowboy vigilante teachers wounding children with stray bullets loosed in a hail of gunfire.

    Whenever I encounter these comments in discussions, I always reply with my typical acidic sarcasm, "Oh yeah. We don't want teachers shooting back. They could inadvertantly graze someone with an accidental miss......

    ...Much better to let a lunatic intentionally shoot them in the head until everyone in the room is dead. That's a preferable alternative."
    From the article.
    Under current law, teachers and staff are forbidden from bringing firearms to school unless their local school board or a school official allows it.
    We must be vigilant and proactive on this bill. Removing the prerogative from the school board or school official is critical to ensuring that those teachers and staff that choose to carry are not subject to adverse employment conditions. Think "whistle blower" laws.

    A citizen must have the same "privilege" to carry on their endorsement as would as staff or a teacher.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •