MO SB 75 Summary Notes

My own notes on SB 75 while reading it through. It is mainly a revision of current law to change "endorsement" to "permit" with some other changes.

Although it covers some of the same issues as HB 436, I believe it takes a weaker stance on them, based on memory; I don't have time to re-read 436 yet tonight. For example, I interpreted that 436 might do away with fingerprinting for CC, and it would lower CC age. 75 obviously is meant to address CC data concerns, but I thought 436 was stronger on that issue. I will look at 436 again later to compare.

And of course 75 doesn't do anything about open carry. It may help about data, hopefully that will be effective, and it encourages schools not to be helpless targets, but otherwise it could be an example of "the more things change the more they stay the same".

Notes:

CC endorsement --> CC permit

sheriff must be peace officer

firearm records only available on court order

school active shooter training and Eddie Eagle

CC permit 3 yr --> 5 yr

CC citizen --> or permanant resident

(age requirement not lowered)

CC, no imprisonment 1 yr --> 2 yr

CC, no dangerous behavior in public --> or closed records

CC photo ID only to verify or replace

CC, "no other" biometric data collected

(fingerprint requirement retained)

NCIS used for name-based background check

provisional CC if no decision in 45 days

CC permit shows name, address, DOB, height, weight, hair/eye color, signature

CC permit wallet sized and uniform

CC data not kept by DOR

CC data not kept over 1 year after denial/expiration

(kept while active)

CC data given to sheriffs and MoSMART (???)

CC data not for batch download or query

CC data only made available for criminal investigation

(but subject to "subsection" wording and MoSMART)

any old CC records must be destroyed AFTER a new permit issued

(so old fail records might be kept indefinitely?)

live firing 50 --> 20 rounds

notarized safety course certificate

no state/fed database/records of gun possession

MoSMART = meth taskforce, 5 sheriffs

Memory didn't serve too well on the CC data issue. I guess that was an earlier version of SB 75 itself or another bill, rather than 436.

The older HSC version of the bill does mention fingerprints and "no other" biometric data, just like the final. However, the older HSC version had different wording on some parts of the data issue, and also a switchblade and fixed blade hunting knife provision that I can't find in the final version. It also talked about destroying data securely to be "irretrievable" which I don't find in the final.

Meanwhile, besides OC and nullification, 436 bans registering, tracking, and taxes/fees that would have a chilling effect on gun ownership, AND makes it the duty of courts and LEOs to protect citizen 2A rights. That "duty" part would be valuable, forcing them to be on the side of gun owners.

436 amendment HA3 was poorly worded and could be changed in 2 respects: nail down the intended scope of the no-publishing part, otherwise it might fail in court and not help anyone as intended, and change the medical questioning/records part from "shall be required" to "shall" and nix or modify the "nothing in this" clause, so that this would actually protect patients from "do you have a gun" questions and make it illegal to ask or record such information.

436 offers a lot that 75 doesn't, and for that matter 75 might not offer as much as it did before. It's good we have 75 to help protect CC data against abuses, but 436 would make history for 2A rights and make OC a lot more common and safer.

Be sure to CALL legislators about the override! Phone calls make an impact. It's easy to ignore emails.