Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: County License Office shennanigans and hijinx.

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

    County License Office shennanigans and hijinx.

    Here's a good one:

    Several weeks ago, I received my CCW renewal notice. I go to the Sheriff, get my qualification notice, and trot down to the local license office.

    The licence office in my county is a private business that contracts its licensing service to the Missouri Department of Revenue. It states on the door "This is a private business operating under contract". Therefore, I assume since it states it is not a public or government entity but actually says, in writing, on the front of the building, that it is a "private company", the restriction on firearms does not apply. The fact that there is no signage on the front of the building anywhere corroborates my belief. Across the street at the courthouse is a BIG SIGN posted in regulation size and print stating "no firearms". THERE IS NO SIGNAGE on the front of the (as stated before) PRIVATELY OWNED license office.

    So, I carried into the place to have the endorsement put on my ID.

    Whereupon, I encounter Office Worker A and B working behind the counter. Nothing is said by them or the five other customers in the place. It takes about 15 minutes before I am called to submit my paperwork. As I am seated at the desk, Office Worker C enters, notices my firearm, and asks: "Who do you work for?" So I tell him. He shrugs, and then walks away and into his office. After a minute or two, the computer goes on the fritz, and Office Worker B calls Office Worker C out of his office. Office Worker C takes my paperwork, tries to put it into the computer, and discovers the Sheriff hasn't done some computer work on his end, and decideds to call him.

    The Sheriff's office tells him it'll be about an hour.

    O.K. I'm not going to sit there for an hour. I tell Office Worker C that I'll come back after I get some lunch. He says O.K. I go get a burger and come back about an hour later.

    Upon entering, Office Worker C asks to talk to me in his office. "Sure. No problem." Upon entering his office, he asks: "You work for (_____________)? Right?" And I say "Yes. That's what I told you before." He replies with: "We only allow law enforcement to carry firearms in here." So I tell him "No problem." (I wasn't going to bring up the subject of signage, that's HIS responsibility.) So I informed him I'd leave my firearm in my vehicle. And he said that's fine. On my way out, he points out a "homemade" sign printed in small lettering on computer paper on a bullitin board well inside the office. "No firearms allowed".

    O.K. I missed it. It wasn't regulation, there's no penalty under law as I folowed his request to leave, and we all know how interesting DMV bulliten boards are to read. I failed to notice the tiny little sign. I came back in unarmed, got my endorsement, and left. Done deal.

    Not quite yet.

    Today at work, my boss calls me into his office. I get a royal ass chewing for "using my employment at (___________)" as an excuse to carry a firearm. I know EXACTLY where this is coming from, before my boss even mentions........

    Seems as though Office Worker C has been calling around using my name and information (Which I believe is private, therefore priveledged information, correct?) to locate me. He finally got hold of my boss (at his home) and proceeded to inform him that I was IMPERSONATING A POLICE OFFICER USING MY EMPLOYMENT AT (_________) AS AUTHORITY TO CARRY A GUN.

    Whoa! AM I PISSED! When did I ever state anything of the sort? I WAS ASKED where I work. At NO POINT DID I CLAIM THAT MY EMPLOYMENT AT (_______________) gave me any authority. THE LAW gives me authority! I need nothing other than THE LAW to carry a firearm. I don't tell ANYONE where I work, and if I do, it's usually very vague. I only told him as he was in a position of authority...the license office. Didn't know what it had to do with my CCW, but the Sheriff had also asked, and I told him. Now if Joe Schmo wants to know, though, the answer is NUNYA. But, I was unaware he was going to use this information in a nefarious manner - to track me down and nasty me to my boss. The exact reason I don't discuss where I work.

    Now. I'm currently in the process of constructing a letter to the head of the Missouri Department of Revenue, which I plan on sending certified, and also setting an appointment face to face with her regarding this incident. I have researched info on Office Worker C, which I will not give out at this time pending further happenings concerning this. I'm considering hiring an attorney as the action he has taken has not made me any friends in my hierarchy at work.

    Sue for libel? I'm wondering what action the Missouri Department of Revenue will take. If none, what then? I'm pretty sure my personal information is not to be used by A PRIVATE BUSINESSES' EMPLOYEE to do what Office Worker C has done.

    Any suggestions on what my next course of action is? MDR is the contracting agency that this licence office works for. They would be the people to go to correct? Any other suggestions?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    115
    I agree that something needs to be done. And I believe you have taken the appropriate action in contacting DOR Director. I do believe that I would give the thought of a law suit serious consideration as I believe it to be beneficial.
    The responsibility is ours, the results, GODS

  3. #3
    Regular Member Jaysann22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    St Louis
    Posts
    109
    Wow. Thats interesting. I'll have to say, its going to be tough to prove this one. Its really your word against the office worker. Plus i highly doubt any workers are going to testify in your favor, if they saw or heard anything at all. Hopefully when you contact the DOR they'll decide to settle upon your threat of legal action to avoid court. Good luck though.


    America is such a joke today. We outsource EVERYTHING. Manufacturing, military, license offices, and even call centers/customer service. Sh!t even picking fruit is outsourced.

    We got laws for monopoly companies, what we really need is a law prohibiting outsourcing...
    Last edited by Jaysann22; 08-10-2010 at 08:31 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member cshoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    , Missouri, USA
    Posts
    687
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    Here's a good one:

    Several weeks ago, I received my CCW renewal notice. I go to the Sheriff, get my qualification notice, and trot down to the local license office.

    The licence office in my county is a private business that contracts its licensing service to the Missouri Department of Revenue. It states on the door "This is a private business operating under contract". Therefore, I assume since it states it is not a public or government entity but actually says, in writing, on the front of the building, that it is a "private company", the restriction on firearms does not apply. The fact that there is no signage on the front of the building anywhere corroborates my belief. Across the street at the courthouse is a BIG SIGN posted in regulation size and print stating "no firearms". THERE IS NO SIGNAGE on the front of the (as stated before) PRIVATELY OWNED license office.

    So, I carried into the place to have the endorsement put on my ID.

    Whereupon, I encounter Office Worker A and B working behind the counter. Nothing is said by them or the five other customers in the place. It takes about 15 minutes before I am called to submit my paperwork. As I am seated at the desk, Office Worker C enters, notices my firearm, and asks: "Who do you work for?" So I tell him. He shrugs, and then walks away and into his office. After a minute or two, the computer goes on the fritz, and Office Worker B calls Office Worker C out of his office. Office Worker C takes my paperwork, tries to put it into the computer, and discovers the Sheriff hasn't done some computer work on his end, and decideds to call him.

    The Sheriff's office tells him it'll be about an hour.

    O.K. I'm not going to sit there for an hour. I tell Office Worker C that I'll come back after I get some lunch. He says O.K. I go get a burger and come back about an hour later.

    Upon entering, Office Worker C asks to talk to me in his office. "Sure. No problem." Upon entering his office, he asks: "You work for (_____________)? Right?" And I say "Yes. That's what I told you before." He replies with: "We only allow law enforcement to carry firearms in here." So I tell him "No problem." (I wasn't going to bring up the subject of signage, that's HIS responsibility.) So I informed him I'd leave my firearm in my vehicle. And he said that's fine. On my way out, he points out a "homemade" sign printed in small lettering on computer paper on a bullitin board well inside the office. "No firearms allowed".

    O.K. I missed it. It wasn't regulation, there's no penalty under law as I folowed his request to leave, and we all know how interesting DMV bulliten boards are to read. I failed to notice the tiny little sign. I came back in unarmed, got my endorsement, and left. Done deal.

    Not quite yet.

    Today at work, my boss calls me into his office. I get a royal ass chewing for "using my employment at (___________)" as an excuse to carry a firearm. I know EXACTLY where this is coming from, before my boss even mentions........

    Seems as though Office Worker C has been calling around using my name and information (Which I believe is private, therefore priveledged information, correct?) to locate me. He finally got hold of my boss (at his home) and proceeded to inform him that I was IMPERSONATING A POLICE OFFICER USING MY EMPLOYMENT AT (_________) AS AUTHORITY TO CARRY A GUN.

    Whoa! AM I PISSED! When did I ever state anything of the sort? I WAS ASKED where I work. At NO POINT DID I CLAIM THAT MY EMPLOYMENT AT (_______________) gave me any authority. THE LAW gives me authority! I need nothing other than THE LAW to carry a firearm. I don't tell ANYONE where I work, and if I do, it's usually very vague. I only told him as he was in a position of authority...the license office. Didn't know what it had to do with my CCW, but the Sheriff had also asked, and I told him. Now if Joe Schmo wants to know, though, the answer is NUNYA. But, I was unaware he was going to use this information in a nefarious manner - to track me down and nasty me to my boss. The exact reason I don't discuss where I work.

    Now. I'm currently in the process of constructing a letter to the head of the Missouri Department of Revenue, which I plan on sending certified, and also setting an appointment face to face with her regarding this incident. I have researched info on Office Worker C, which I will not give out at this time pending further happenings concerning this. I'm considering hiring an attorney as the action he has taken has not made me any friends in my hierarchy at work.

    Sue for libel? I'm wondering what action the Missouri Department of Revenue will take. If none, what then? I'm pretty sure my personal information is not to be used by A PRIVATE BUSINESSES' EMPLOYEE to do what Office Worker C has done.

    Any suggestions on what my next course of action is? MDR is the contracting agency that this licence office works for. They would be the people to go to correct? Any other suggestions?
    Question - Did this DMV employee, at any time, inform your boss that you have a CCW permit? If so, this employee is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor under RSMO 571.101.8.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    1) Should I ask my boss if he did?

    2) Wouldn't the fact of asking my boss negate the fact of Office Worker C telling him?

    For example: If I go into work tomorrow and say, "Hey Boss, did that guy from the License Office inform you that I was there to renew my CCW permit?"...wouldn't this be informing my boss that I have a CCW permit, therefore negating the fact of Office Worker C informing him as I have effectively informed him myself?

    How should I go about this? My boss never mentioned it, he merely chewed on me for using my employment as authority to OC. Once I explained to my boss that I didn't need to, as the LAW is all I need to OC, that Office Worker C merely asked where I worked, and that Office Worker C was making **** up, that was the end of it......my boss told me to get out of his office and go back to work.

    What is the correct procedure to follow if Office Worker C did, in fact, inform my boss? How do I find out without asking my boss and effectively informing him myself? I'm guessing, if he didn't know before, he can pretty much GUESS since Office Worker C has identified himself to my boss as a License Office Employee and made up a bunch of lies about my carrying of a firearm.

    ETA: Of course, the text of 571.101.8 doesn't state "qualifiers"......

    All information on any such certificate that is protected information on any driver's or nondriver's license shall have the same personal protection for purposes of sections 571.101 to 571.121. An applicant's status as a holder of a certificate of qualification or a concealed carry endorsement shall not be public information and shall be considered personal protected information. Any person who violates the provisions of this subsection by disclosing protected information shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor.
    ...so if he did inform my boss, it would still be illegal whether or not I waved my CCW in my boss's face or not, correct? The way I read it, the very act of him informing my boss is illegal regardless, am I right?
    Last edited by Superlite27; 08-10-2010 at 09:44 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    south central MO, USA
    Posts
    95

    one question

    Would the private contractor( or employee of) be considered an employee of the the DMN or DOR? This could be shaky ground for a civil matter. I agree they never should have released any kind of information about your possession of CCW, your choice to OC, or any your private matters in general. And I feel they should be reprimanded in some fashion. But from a legal standpoint I personally would be afraid to pursue any monetary damages unless it was on some type of contingency basis. But hey, I am in no way shape, form, or fashion an attorney. And I hope that I am wrong to worry.

  7. #7
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    I think you should likely stop discussing it in printed form in public and PM a few folks about it and contact an atty before you send a letter.

    I know your not lookin to get paid, but this workers behavior needs to be put into check, not just a "we will look into it" response and that letter coming from an atty would have a bit more impact.

    DMV folks also carry guns and read forums, I would not put anymore info out here at all super.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    south central MO, USA
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    1) Should I ask my boss if he did?

    2) Wouldn't the fact of asking my boss negate the fact of Office Worker C telling him?

    For example: If I go into work tomorrow and say, "Hey Boss, did that guy from the License Office inform you that I was there to renew my CCW permit?"...wouldn't this be informing my boss that I have a CCW permit, therefore negating the fact of Office Worker C informing him as I have effectively informed him myself?

    How should I go about this? My boss never mentioned it, he merely chewed on me for using my employment as authority to OC. Once I explained to my boss that I didn't need to, as the LAW is all I need to OC, that Office Worker C merely asked where I worked, and that Office Worker C was making **** up, that was the end of it......my boss told me to get out of his office and go back to work.

    What is the correct procedure to follow if Office Worker C did, in fact, inform my boss? How do I find out without asking my boss and effectively informing him myself? I'm guessing, if he didn't know before, he can pretty much GUESS since Office Worker C has identified himself to my boss as a License Office Employee and made up a bunch of lies about my carrying of a firearm.

    ETA: Of course, the text of 571.101.8 doesn't state "qualifiers"......



    ...so if he did inform my boss, it would still be illegal whether or not I waved my CCW in my boss's face or not, correct? The way I read it, the very act of him informing my boss is illegal regardless, am I right?
    I hope you at least you got an apology from your boss. Your due one.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    I'm not "seeking monetary damages". I'm seeking ethical justice. The guy not only lied in an unscrupulous manner, he purposefully used my personal information to seek out my boss, at home and concoct a story that was obviously intended to cause me, at minimum, distress.

    If he did inform my boss of my license status, it was illegal, therefore should be punished according to the law, correct?

    Any redress I seek will be of a punative nature. He should not get away with calling folk's bosses and trying to ruin their personal lives. Whether his attempts are effective or not is irrellevant. His attempt is just plain wrong. That's the principle. Hopefully, the DOR will administer the correct remedy: Ensuring that he is unable to do this again by removal of his ability to gain mine, and other's personal information.

    If not, I'm merely considering litigation as an alternative.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Thanks LMTD. This is about all I'm going to share for now. I believe I've kept it vague enough. Let me know if I haven't.

    Anyone else feel free to reccommend ideas.

  11. #11
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    Your point is good and honorable.

    I am not inclined to think their response will be, I in fact think they will try very hard to hide that it ever happened at all and will avoid it 100%

    Not unlike poker, getting a lawyer afterward is like tipping your hand and then betting.

    If they know it is coming, they can defend it, if they get the request for records to PROVE it before they know, they are far more likely to be responsive to you thoughts.

    Just an opinion from a guy who has to do such things all the time.

  12. #12
    Regular Member cshoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    , Missouri, USA
    Posts
    687
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    1) Should I ask my boss if he did?

    2) Wouldn't the fact of asking my boss negate the fact of Office Worker C telling him?

    For example: If I go into work tomorrow and say, "Hey Boss, did that guy from the License Office inform you that I was there to renew my CCW permit?"...wouldn't this be informing my boss that I have a CCW permit, therefore negating the fact of Office Worker C informing him as I have effectively informed him myself?

    How should I go about this? My boss never mentioned it, he merely chewed on me for using my employment as authority to OC. Once I explained to my boss that I didn't need to, as the LAW is all I need to OC, that Office Worker C merely asked where I worked, and that Office Worker C was making **** up, that was the end of it......my boss told me to get out of his office and go back to work.

    What is the correct procedure to follow if Office Worker C did, in fact, inform my boss? How do I find out without asking my boss and effectively informing him myself? I'm guessing, if he didn't know before, he can pretty much GUESS since Office Worker C has identified himself to my boss as a License Office Employee and made up a bunch of lies about my carrying of a firearm.

    ETA: Of course, the text of 571.101.8 doesn't state "qualifiers"......



    ...so if he did inform my boss, it would still be illegal whether or not I waved my CCW in my boss's face or not, correct? The way I read it, the very act of him informing my boss is illegal regardless, am I right?
    You might start by asking your boss, "Do you mind telling me exactly what worker C said to you?". 571.101.8, IMO, is very clear as to the "qualifiers".

    If a person knowingly discloses your status as a CCW holder, he/she is in violation. Specifically, <snip from RSMO 571.101.8>.....An applicant's status as a holder of a certificate of qualification or a concealed carry endorsement shall not be public information and shall be considered personal protected information. Any person who violates the provisions of this subsection by disclosing protected information shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor.....<snip>.

    Yep. I think I would take what information you have, and whatever additional information you obtain, off-line to an attorney. No need to tip your hand to anyone via way of the internet.
    Last edited by cshoff; 08-10-2010 at 10:09 PM.

  13. #13
    Regular Member cash50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    349
    Wow what a *****. Sounds like another anti/ignorant person.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ParkHills, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    970
    Good Luck Seperlite, sounds like you have an awesome opportunity to put something in Missouris books for case law. and as a by product get joe schmucks contract revoked with the state of Missouri, obvoiusly the Employee can't be trusted or Bonded with the average citizens private information and you most likely aren't the only citizen this schmuck has violated, just the only one that found out about his underhanded ways of looking into peoples privacy.

    I would definitely take this as high as it will go !

  15. #15
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    I have spoken with numerous attorneys over the past several hours and the general consensus is that I have an excellent case, but am unable to demonstrate a material "loss", therefore, litigation would be pointless as I would have to demonstrate received "damages" in order to be compensated for them. Had I been fired, or suffered any calcuable monetary loss, physical injury, or psycological problems (I have not sought therapy for this) I would then be able to seek damages. As I cannot point out any received injury, the likelihood of a successful litigation is almost nil.

    Almost all have pointed out that this is more of a criminal case than a civil litigation case, and this would be more appropriately handled by informing his hierarchy of his improper actions.
    Last edited by Superlite27; 08-11-2010 at 04:25 PM. Reason: add info

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    I have spoken with numerous attorneys over the past several hours and the general consensus is that I have an excellent case, but am unable to demonstrate a material "loss", therefore, litigation would be pointless as I would have to demonstrate received "damages" in order to be compensated for them. Had I been fired, or suffered any calcuable monetary loss, physical injury, or psycological problems (I have not sought therapy for this) I would then be able to seek damages. As I cannot point out any received injury, the likelihood of a successful litigation is almost nil.

    Almost all have pointed out that this is more of a criminal case than a civil litigation case, and this would be more appropriately handled by informing his hierarchy of his improper actions.
    Get a 'marker' filing of some sort in the works to prevent a statute of limitations passing. In a few months time if you receive a negative comment in a work evaluation/review/promotion hearing/whatever relating to this incident, you now have a demonstrable 'loss' (your raise/promotion/good standing at work) to pursue civilly.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    south central MO, USA
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    I have spoken with numerous attorneys over the past several hours and the general consensus is that I have an excellent case, but am unable to demonstrate a material "loss", therefore, litigation would be pointless as I would have to demonstrate received "damages" in order to be compensated for them. Had I been fired, or suffered any calcuable monetary loss, physical injury, or psycological problems (I have not sought therapy for this) I would then be able to seek damages. As I cannot point out any received injury, the likelihood of a successful litigation is almost nil.

    Almost all have pointed out that this is more of a criminal case than a civil litigation case, and this would be more appropriately handled by informing his hierarchy of his improper actions.
    That is kind of what I was afraid of. While I am not a lawyer and did not intend to imply that you would seek monitary damages. I was afraid that would be the only reason a lawyer would get involved.
    But I would definately bend or twist off the superiors ear, of this person. And try to make sure it never happened to anyone else if possible.And if he could take the time to make the call to your boss about what transpired in the 1st meeting, he could damn well could make the second phone call to admit his mistake to your boss. Good luck to you.
    Last edited by Freedom 1st; 08-11-2010 at 07:01 PM.

  18. #18
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    Surprised a little however it makes some sense.

    I would file a written complaint to the director of the DMV, not someone local. I would make it clear that you have strong evidence that state statues were violated because of the criminal behavior and make it clear you have every intent on requesting charges be filed and you will indeed swear out a complaint and press charges if not resolved quickly and completely to your satisfaction.

    I would CC the state AG's office to alert them that your note has teeth and you are a very unhappy camper, which you should be 100% this was a deliberate violation and it needs to be dealt with harshly.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    10
    Swear out a complaint and press charges if possible. This should not require a lawyer. Personally I think this is being posted on the wring forum considering this is a CCL issue and there are many more connected legal beagles over at MOcarry.
    Last edited by jjtroutbum; 08-12-2010 at 10:39 AM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Good to see you again jj. I kind of faded away from MOcarry as my proclivity for open carry, while not directly "bad mouthed" to my face, has resulted in harsh looks being directed down haughty noses in my direction over at MOCarry. I haven't posted there in a year or so. To show up simply when I need advice wouldn't really be appropriate IMHO. I'm not a "fair weather friend". I don't just show up when I need help.

    However, if you're going to the annual picnic this fall, I'll see you there. I still consider the folks from MOCarry "friends", I just don't agree with many of "their" views.

    OCDO is my home now. Glad to see you here. You're always welcome here in my view.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Mo.
    Posts
    279
    Well I certainly hope you're ready to be flogged at the stake on this issue, you earned after all.

    1. You entered an establishment affiliated with the DOR (contract affiliation) while OC'ing. Bad move on your end. You're act of OC'ing is not private...it's public. (duh)

    2. You made the fatal error of engaging in conversation with one of their employees on a matter unrelated to your business there. Bad move again.

    3. You made an even more fatal error by disclosing your employer. (do you see a pattern yet?) That information is no longer private when you disclose it!

    4. When that employee made efforts to utilize your personal information to contact your employer, you should have immediately contacted the Sheriff and filed a harrassment complaint. Because you failed to do just that you may no longer have grounds for a lawsuit, so you had better get moving fast on #5.

    5. If your job is in jeopardy now or punishment may be in the future, you MUST lawyer up.


    So I'll say it again as I have before. There is a time and place for OC and a time and place for CCW. If you choose to OC, you had better be prepared for the reactions of others and the consequences that may follow.

    Good luck with this and I certainly hope it turns out for the better for you...worse for that particular employee.
    Last edited by heresyourdipstickjimmy; 08-12-2010 at 11:10 AM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by heresyourdipstickjimmy View Post
    Well I certainly hope you're ready to be flogged at the stake on this issue, you earned after all.

    1. You entered an establishment affiliated with the DOR (contract affiliation) while OC'ing. Bad move on your end. You're act of OC'ing is not private...it's public. (duh)
    I've also entered private establishments affiliated with Wal-Mart. Is that also a bad move? How about private establishments affiliated with Starbucks? Taco Bell? I'm a little foggy on why a private establishment is different because of their contractor. Please direct me to "heresyourdipstickjimmy's list of approved places to open carry". After I check state and local laws, I'll make sure to get your approval to OC since you're obviously are the authority on where it's appropriate. Where, exactly, do you consider OC'ing a "good move"? From what I've seen, the only place you'd probably put on that list is my own bathroom (but only with the light off).

    2. You made the fatal error of engaging in conversation with one of their employees on a matter unrelated to your business there. Bad move again.
    I'll keep this in mind. From now on, when approached by strangers in Denny's, I'll keep conversations directly related to scrambled eggs and the crispyness of my toast. While I agree with the general idea of avoiding the mention of personal information, HOW DO I FILL OUT A FORM TO BE HANDED TO THE GUY IN ORDER TO GET MY I.D. WITHOUT FILLING OUT ANY OF THE LINES REQUIRING NAME, ADDRESS, HEIGHT, WEIGHT, ETC.? Yes, you are correct. In hindsight I should have refused to answer the question. I usually do. But two points interfered with my usual avoidance of the topic: 1) I was unable to tell he was going to be a &$%# until afterward. 2) He was already looking at a screen with my personal info, he is in a position of "semi" authority: the person contracted to interact between the DOR and me in order to give me my license. In this case a non-driver I.D. with CCW endorsement. (He wasn't handling my license at first, merely looking over the shoulder of Office Employee B. But, after the computer went bonkers, he was called back out of his office and took over her place.)

    3. You made an even more fatal error by disclosing your employer. (do you see a pattern yet?) That information is no longer private when you disclose it!
    This I can agree 100% with you on. Hindsight is 20/20. This incident has taken something I rarely talk about, and moved it into the "never talk about" category.

    4. When that employee made efforts to utilize your personal information to contact your employer, you should have immediately contacted the Sheriff and filed a harrassment complaint. Because you failed to do just that you may no longer have grounds for a lawsuit, so you had better get moving fast on #5.
    How was I supposed to know until he did so? I am not prescient. My crystal ball only tells me when my truck needs an oil change.

    Because you failed to do just that
    What's the statute of limitation? Three days? Yesterday I talked to attorneys about it. No dice. Now I'm going to contact his superiors by writing a letter and sending it certified mail. As LMTD said, I'll most likely get glad-handed, but this isn't going to stop me from doing so. I have a meeting with the Sheriff on Monday concerning another matter. It is a good opportunity to discuss the whole shebang with him then.

    [QUOTE}5. If your job is in jeopardy now or punishment may be in the future, you MUST lawyer up.[/QUOTE]

    My job is nowhere near "in jeopardy". Boss was just mad, but no longer, now that he knows the deal.


    So I'll say it again as I have before. There is a time and place for OC and a time and place for CCW. If you choose to OC, you had better be prepared for the reactions of others and the consequences that may follow.

    Good luck with this and I certainly hope it turns out for the better for you...worse for that particular employee.
    I agree with this, as well. Thanks for the well wishes, but most likely, nothing will come of this. Other than a few ruffled feathers on my part, it will probably become Missouri's next greatest non-event. I'll post any replies from the DOR, and the Sheriff if I receive any.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ParkHills, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    970
    Quote Originally Posted by heresyourdipstickjimmy View Post
    Well I certainly hope you're ready to be flogged at the stake on this issue, you earned after all.

    1. You entered an establishment affiliated with the DOR (contract affiliation) while OC'ing. Bad move on your end. You're act of OC'ing is not private...it's public. (duh)

    2. You made the fatal error of engaging in conversation with one of their employees on a matter unrelated to your business there. Bad move again.

    3. You made an even more fatal error by disclosing your employer. (do you see a pattern yet?) That information is no longer private when you disclose it!

    4. When that employee made efforts to utilize your personal information to contact your employer, you should have immediately contacted the Sheriff and filed a harrassment complaint. Because you failed to do just that you may no longer have grounds for a lawsuit, so you had better get moving fast on #5.

    5. If your job is in jeopardy now or punishment may be in the future, you MUST lawyer up.


    So I'll say it again as I have before. There is a time and place for OC and a time and place for CCW. If you choose to OC, you had better be prepared for the reactions of others and the consequences that may follow.

    Good luck with this and I certainly hope it turns out for the better for you...worse for that particular employee.
    NO !! You are dead wrong, the Laws of the state specifically demand proper Signage !! That trumps every argument that you can dream up.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ParkHills, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    970
    If it's not against your character Superlite, I'd like to know the owner of the DMV contract you're referring to, because I'll check it against the business owner who runs 2 DMV offices in my area, I have one 5 miles north of my location and 5 miles south of my location.

  25. #25
    Regular Member cshoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    , Missouri, USA
    Posts
    687
    Quote Originally Posted by Carnivore View Post
    NO !! You are dead wrong, the Laws of the state specifically demand proper Signage !! That trumps every argument that you can dream up.
    Actually, as it applies to open carry without a CCW endorsement, proper signage would not be necessary. Under RSMO 571.030.1(8), it would be unlawful to carry any firearm in any manner "....into any building owned or occupied by any agency of the federal government, state government, or political subdivision thereof....".

    Now, in Superlite's case, he apparently DOES possess a valid CCW endorsement and, as stated in RSMO 571.030.4, Subdivision 8 of RSMO 571.030.1 would NOT apply to him. In that case, the building would have to be posted as per RSMO 571.107.1(6).

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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