• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Interesting Argument

cshoff

Regular Member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
687
Location
, Missouri, USA
This is one of the conflicts in the RSMO that I've brought up to local LEOs and they simply do not have an answer. I'll do some digging again and try to find my print-outs from when I asked about this. There's a section of RSMO that says secondary education is a school which would be protected in school zones, however 571 clearly states that carry is lawful IF permission is granted. If memory serves, I found a portion of US Code (safe schools act) that illustrated that secondary education facilities were not "schools" (it's actually K-12) and are clearly secondary education facilities.

Again, let me dig and I'll find the file. I put it in the "do not toss/shred" box some time ago because I could not get anyone to address the conflict in the RSMO.

But I'll return us to my first post and that large paragraph covering those 17 items and states "shall not be a crime" for valid CCW permit holders. Read it, know it, keep a copy handy.

On the issue of OC (I failed to read the entire OP didn't I), OC on a school campus or a college campus WILL get you brought in for questioning in a huge hurry. But I too have read and re-read and have come to the same conclusion that it "shall not be a crime" for a valid CCW permit holder to carry (type of carry IS NOT addressed in the statute) in one of those 17 prohibited locales and that I can only be asked/told to leave. At that point, any refusal constitutes trespass (denial of access to per the statute). Remember, no matter how any of us interprets this conflict issue...all they need to do is hit you with a disorderly conduct charge and you're screwed. It's exactly why CCW is almost always the smarter and safer choice.

Federal code specifically refers to "schools", both elementary and secondary, which fall under definitions "as determined under state law". In that case, RSMO Chapter 160 (specifically 160.011), defines what qualifies as a school in the State of Missouri.
 

heresyourdipstickjimmy

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
279
Location
Mo.
Federal code specifically refers to "schools", both elementary and secondary, which fall under definitions "as determined under state law". In that case, RSMO Chapter 160 (specifically 160.011), defines what qualifies as a school in the State of Missouri.

I figured. Still going to dig out that particular file, particularly because RSMO 160 was one of the statutes that created the whole "school" conflict for CCW and is cause for a lot of confusion and headaches.

However, that paragraph I keep mentioning is VERY specific in how it reads in regards to those 17 items. That said, pay specific attention to the "permission" requirement for colleges. (note that the Statute DOES NOT say school, it says higher education institution, elementary, or secondary school facility) And that my friends is part of the conflict with 160 in that the language is not consistent and often consists of double talk. Definitions for all 3 terms need to be located:

Higher Education Institution
Elementary School
Secondary School Facility

(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

Here's 160 and it does not cover HEI or SSF, so if it's there it has to be somewhere else.

http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c100-199/1600000011.htm
 
Last edited:

HYRYSC

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
204
Location
Somewhere in MO
Some how it seems folks are trying to read something into this that simply is not there, or it looks that way to me.

There are a whole bunch of places you may not carry a gun, a concealed weapons permit eliminates some of those areas aka like the streets of St Louis city. It does NOT change the rules in some areas and has specifically stated it does not change the rules for school.

This is why I threw such a fit about legal advice. It would be sad if someone read only part of this thread and thought it meant only concealed weapons were illegal on school property and open carried to pick up their child after school resulting in them with a felony arrest and all their firearms seized and the loss of their gun rights forever.

I am all for fighting to get the laws fixed, but these misguided ideas about loops holes that simply do not exist are inviting nothing but serious trouble and negative feeback.

I do know know which "misguided idea about loops holes (sic)" you are referring, I was simply asking a question regarding my reading of the law.

If someone read only part of this thread, then that would be their error, just as it would be if someone read only part of the law respecting the carrying of a firearm.
 

heresyourdipstickjimmy

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
279
Location
Mo.
Some how it seems folks are trying to read something into this that simply is not there, or it looks that way to me.

There are a whole bunch of places you may not carry a gun, a concealed weapons permit eliminates some of those areas aka like the streets of St Louis city. It does NOT change the rules in some areas and has specifically stated it does not change the rules for school.

This is why I threw such a fit about legal advice. It would be sad if someone read only part of this thread and thought it meant only concealed weapons were illegal on school property and open carried to pick up their child after school resulting in them with a felony arrest and all their firearms seized and the loss of their gun rights forever.

I am all for fighting to get the laws fixed, but these misguided ideas about loops holes that simply do not exist are inviting nothing but serious trouble and negative feeback.

I do know know which "misguided idea about loops holes (sic)" you are referring, I was simply asking a question regarding my reading of the law.

If someone read only part of this thread, then that would be their error, just as it would be if someone read only part of the law respecting the carrying of a firearm.


Actually if you read the paragraph I keep referring to, it illustrates that Missouri cannot charge you with a crime at the State or Municipal level for carrying within a "safe school zone" IF you hold a valid CCW permit. "Places prohibited by Federal law" is one of those 17 items and that paragraph protects you from State or municipal criminal charges, however as has been illustrated, the Fed can hook you up with a Federal charge on the issue.

Read that particular paragraph carefully, then go back and read those 17 locations. See if it reads how I interpreted it...and it's pretty black and white, no gray area at all given the paragraph at the bottom. Those words "shall not be a crime" are where the protection for CCW holders lies. Remember, nothing within the statute says a valid CCW holder must carry concealed.

I do remember when CCW in Mo started that it was understood that if you obtained your CCW that you gave up your right to OC. Clearly that's not found anywhere in the Statutes and it's understood by most of us (OC and CCW alike) that OC is legal, but the municipalities can regulate it.
 
Last edited:

cshoff

Regular Member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
687
Location
, Missouri, USA
<snip>.....Remember, nothing within the statute says a valid CCW holder must carry concealed.

I do remember when CCW in Mo started that it was understood that if you obtained your CCW that you gave up your right to OC. Clearly that's not found anywhere in the Statutes and it's understood by most of us (OC and CCW alike) that OC is legal, but the municipalities can regulate it.

Actually, there is language in RSMO 571.101.1 that very specifically states that a person who has been issued a valid CCW endorsement may carry concealed firearms on or about his/her person or within a vehicle. It says nothing at all about openly carried firearms:

571.101. 1. All applicants for concealed carry endorsements issued pursuant to subsection 7 of this section must satisfy the requirements of sections 571.101 to 571.121. If the said applicant can show qualification as provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, the county or city sheriff shall issue a certificate of qualification for a concealed carry endorsement. Upon receipt of such certificate, the certificate holder shall apply for a driver's license or nondriver's license with the director of revenue in order to obtain a concealed carry endorsement. Any person who has been issued a concealed carry endorsement on a driver's license or nondriver's license and such endorsement or license has not been suspended, revoked, canceled, or denied may carry concealed firearms on or about his or her person or within a vehicle. A concealed carry endorsement shall be valid for a period of three years from the date of issuance or renewal. The concealed carry endorsement is valid throughout this state.
 
Top