Interesting Argument

HYRYSC · Aug 16, 2010

Ok, this might be a bit lengthy, but bear with me and I will make this as succinct as I possibly can.

A friend and I were talking about where we could carry open and where we had to carry concealed. This prompted me to begin studying the statutes again to see if I could define things a bit better for myself.

So according to Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 571-Weapons Offenses-Section 571.030 found here http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5710000030.HTM

Paragraph 4 states that I as a valid concealed carry holder can legally:

(8) Carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any church or place where people have assembled for worship, or into any election precinct on any election day, or into any building owned or occupied by any agency of the federal government, state government, or political subdivision thereof; or

(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.

I had never noticed this before, but neither of these two paragraphs specifically delineate "concealed".

But then you have this Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 571-Weapons Offenses-Section 571.107 found here

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

which states that our CCW endorsement does not allow us to carry CONCEALED into all the enumerated facilities, places etc.

So with this being said, it appears to me after reading, re-reading and re-re-reading the law, that because I have my concealed carry endorsement, I could OPEN CARRY legally into a school, place of higher education, church etc.

Someone show me the error of my ways...

cshoff · Aug 16, 2010

HYRYSC said:
Ok, this might be a bit lengthy, but bear with me and I will make this as succinct as I possibly can.

A friend and I were talking about where we could carry open and where we had to carry concealed. This prompted me to begin studying the statutes again to see if I could define things a bit better for myself.

So according to Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 571-Weapons Offenses-Section 571.030 found here http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5710000030.HTM

Paragraph 4 states that I as a valid concealed carry holder can legally:

(8) Carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any church or place where people have assembled for worship, or into any election precinct on any election day, or into any building owned or occupied by any agency of the federal government, state government, or political subdivision thereof; or

(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.

I had never noticed this before, but neither of these two paragraphs specifically delineate "concealed".

Actually, what 571.030.1 says is:

A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly;
.
.
.
(8) Carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any church or place where people have assembled for worship, or into any election precinct on any election day, or into any building owned or occupied by any agency of the federal government, state government, or political subdivision thereof; or
.
.
(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.

So RSMO 571.030.1 (8) and (10) have clearly defined that it is unlawful to do either of those things, regardless if the gun is carried openly or concealed. The exemption comes in RSMO 571.030.4 where it exempts anyone with a valid CCW endorsement. However, that doesn't mean you can just arbitrarily enter with your exposed or concealed firearm. See below......

But then you have this Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 571-Weapons Offenses-Section 571.107 found here

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

which states that our CCW endorsement does not allow us to carry CONCEALED into all the enumerated facilities, places etc.

So with this being said, it appears to me after reading, re-reading and re-re-reading the law, that because I have my concealed carry endorsement, I could OPEN CARRY legally into a school, place of higher education, church etc.

Someone show me the error of my ways...

RSMO 571.107 then goes on to say that your CCW endorsement does not authorize (meaning that the state does not have the authority to authorize) you to carry into the 16 following places without permission from someone in control or with authority over those places. That means you are supposed to ask for and be granted permission from someone with the authority to give said permission before you carry your firearm, exposed or concealed, into any school or any church. Private property owners always retain final authority over their property and the state does not have the authority to supersede that authority. Granted, if you had a valid CCW endorsement and you carried into either of the above mentioned buildings with your exposed firearm, it would NOT be a criminal offense under state law, however, in a school, you would be subject to the laws of the Federal School Zones act. And in the case of OC, you would (obviously) be subject to local law or ordinance here in Missouri. And in any case, you could be denied entrance to the building by whoever has control over that building, and you would be obligated to comply or be subject to trespass charges.

cash50 · Aug 16, 2010

So basically carrying into schools and churches is a PITA.

LMTD · Aug 16, 2010

The law regarding schools was federal not state or local. It was labeled the gun free zone act in 1990.

Note I said WAS, it is no longer federal law as SCOTUS ruled congress could not enact such a law under the methods they used. That decision just finalized more or less in 2000.

Upon its removal, many state legislators grand standed and said if the feds won't do it, we will! And they passed state laws that prohibit it.

As Hoff said, too many folks think that CCW license grant a right, they do not. They grant a privilege and can only force the government bodies to respect and honor that as prescribed by law. Private parties / business's, certain locations do remain restricted from the privilege and entering them with a concealed weapon is and is not criminal based upon the statute applied.

In other words, the privilege trumps some laws, but not others, but it only trumps the ones the CCW law specifically addresses and it is not safe to assume the opposite.

cshoff · Aug 16, 2010

cash50 said:
So basically carrying into schools and churches is a PITA.

In my experience, churches are not a PITA at all. We've done a number of CCW classes for entire groups of people from churches. In fact, we had a church group just this past weekend. Most churches seem quite willing to grant permission for CCW endorsement holders to carry while in church (usually concealed). However, not ALL churches work that way. Some may not give you permission to carry. It becomes decision making time at that point, IMHO.

Schools are an entirely different matter. Most school officials aren't even aware that they can give a person permission to carry a firearm into the school. Furthermore, even if they are aware that they can, it's very unlikely that they would.

cash50 · Aug 16, 2010

cshoff said:
In my experience, churches are not a PITA at all. We've done a number of CCW classes for entire groups of people from churches. In fact, we had a church group just this past weekend. Most churches seem quite willing to grant permission for CCW endorsement holders to carry while in church (usually concealed). However, not ALL churches work that way. Some may not give you permission to carry. It becomes decision making time at that point, IMHO.

Schools are an entirely different matter. Most school officials aren't even aware that they can give a person permission to carry a firearm into the school. Furthermore, even if they are aware that they can, it's very unlikely that they would.

Which official would grant this permission? Just one of the principals? Is verbal permission ok, or does it need to be written?

cshoff · Aug 16, 2010

cash50 said:
Which official would grant this permission? Just one of the principals? Is verbal permission ok, or does it need to be written?

Missouri law clearly calls for consent to come from "the governing body of the higher education institution or a school official or the district school board." It has to come from someone who actually has the authority to grant such consent. At no point does the statute say that the consent must be written. However, if it was me and I was given explicit permission to carry in the school, I'd want it in writing just to cover my backside in case something happened. This would, hopefully, prevent the person who gave me permission from trying to throw me under the bus.

LMTD · Aug 16, 2010

Schools have more than just the permission issue to deal with, despite it being that simple.

If a school grants a person permission for a person to carry within the school, they now have the full liability for that persons actions. In other words when the person shoots the bad guy, the bad guy can sue the school even if the shooter is fully vindicated and cleared of any and all wrong doing. Your not going to find many if any school that is going to step out on that limb. It is also possible that as a board member whom is covered by sovereignty as an employee, that goes away if they find you were negligent in your decision.

Are these stretches? Yes, but large cases have been settled on far less and no legal counsel advising the board would ever approve of them taking such a risk. They would recommend armed security guards or police long before they would consider armed civilians or teachers, I mean it is REALLLLLY a lost cause in more ways than one.

Add to it the vast majority of teachers being union aka democrat aka anti-gun (I hate stereotypes too but the majority in this case is accurate) you invite any anti-gun teacher to file a grievance that they do not have to worry about mr gun owner having a gun at the work place aka a school with kids and you have invited one hell of a battle.

Add another element "the million mom march" and they find out you allow guns at school, see how fast you have rallies against your next election to the board or they seek your resignation.

Never forget anti's are just as passionate as we are, not all gun owners want guns in schools and if you did a fair poll, you would likely find a majority of folks would think it is a bad idea.

I frankly think if you went before the board and requested it, they would find it so unusual they would likely call and report it to the police and would imply they felt some level of threat just because you made the polite request.

I won't say it will NEVER happen, but I can assure you I would not bet a dime on it ever happening. It did not change when the vice principal told his story where he had to run 1/4 mile to get his gun from his car parked off property and run back to stop a shooter and hold him for the cops, i can not imagine it would change just because someone asked and there is more to lose by asking than there is to gain IMHO.

cshoff · Aug 16, 2010

LMTD said:
Schools have more than just the permission issue to deal with, despite it being that simple.

If a school grants a person permission for a person to carry within the school, they now have the full liability for that persons actions. In other words when the person shoots the bad guy, the bad guy can sue the school even if the shooter is fully vindicated and cleared of any and all wrong doing. Your not going to find many if any school that is going to step out on that limb. It is also possible that as a board member whom is covered by sovereignty as an employee, that goes away if they find you were negligent in your decision.

Are these stretches? Yes, but large cases have been settled on far less and no legal counsel advising the board would ever approve of them taking such a risk. They would recommend armed security guards or police long before they would consider armed civilians or teachers, I mean it is REALLLLLY a lost cause in more ways than one.

Add to it the vast majority of teachers being union aka democrat aka anti-gun (I hate stereotypes too but the majority in this case is accurate) you invite any anti-gun teacher to file a grievance that they do not have to worry about mr gun owner having a gun at the work place aka a school with kids and you have invited one hell of a battle.

Add another element "the million mom march" and they find out you allow guns at school, see how fast you have rallies against your next election to the board or they seek your resignation.

Never forget anti's are just as passionate as we are, not all gun owners want guns in schools and if you did a fair poll, you would likely find a majority of folks would think it is a bad idea.

I frankly think if you went before the board and requested it, they would find it so unusual they would likely call and report it to the police and would imply they felt some level of threat just because you made the polite request.

I won't say it will NEVER happen, but I can assure you I would not bet a dime on it ever happening. It did not change when the vice principal told his story where he had to run 1/4 mile to get his gun from his car parked off property and run back to stop a shooter and hold him for the cops, i can not imagine it would change just because someone asked and there is more to lose by asking than there is to gain IMHO.

I know of a number of schools who have given permission to different people to bring firearms into the school for educational purposes, but I've never heard of one in Missouri consenting to concealed firearms being brought in by staff or CCW holders. The bottom line is, school boards and administrators are generally deathly afraid of anything that has to do with guns. So much so that if a student even draws a picture of one, it all but makes the 6 o'clock news.

If you happen to be a person who has to spend a lot of time in a school, you'll probably just have to come to grips with the fact that you are going to have to be there unarmed.

LMTD · Aug 16, 2010

cshoff said:
I know of a number of schools who have given permission to different people to bring firearms into the school for educational purposes, but I've never heard of one in Missouri consenting to concealed firearms being brought in by staff or CCW holders. The bottom line is, school boards and administrators are generally deathly afraid of anything that has to do with guns. So much so that if a student even draws a picture of one, it all but makes the 6 o'clock news.

If you happen to be a person who has to spend a lot of time in a school, you'll probably just have to come to grips with the fact that you are going to have to be there unarmed.

LOL and what these younger folks have missed is the rifle and shot gun clubs that used to be sponsored by the schools along with firearms safety classes.

It is also my understanding that if a school uses police officers on property even as a resource officer, they have to be granted this "special permission" as they are not supposed to come on campus armed unless they are called for an investigation. I do not know this for a fact, but I have been told similar by resource officers that have been assigned to schools.

I wish all of the teachers at the sites of the school shootings had indeed been armed, the loss of life count would likely be much lower.

HYRYSC · Aug 17, 2010

cshoff said:
Actually, what 571.030.1 says is:

A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly;
.
.
.
(8) Carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use into any church or place where people have assembled for worship, or into any election precinct on any election day, or into any building owned or occupied by any agency of the federal government, state government, or political subdivision thereof; or
.
.
(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.

So RSMO 571.030.1 (8) and (10) have clearly defined that it is unlawful to do either of those things, regardless if the gun is carried openly or concealed. The exemption comes in RSMO 571.030.4 where it exempts anyone with a valid CCW endorsement. However, that doesn't mean you can just arbitrarily enter with your exposed or concealed firearm. See below......

RSMO 571.107 then goes on to say that your CCW endorsement does not authorize (meaning that the state does not have the authority to authorize) you to carry into the 16 following places without permission from someone in control or with authority over those places. That means you are supposed to ask for and be granted permission from someone with the authority to give said permission before you carry your firearm, exposed or concealed, into any school or any church. Private property owners always retain final authority over their property and the state does not have the authority to supersede that authority. Granted, if you had a valid CCW endorsement and you carried into either of the above mentioned buildings with your exposed firearm, it would NOT be a criminal offense under state law, however, in a school, you would be subject to the laws of the Federal School Zones act. And in the case of OC, you would (obviously) be subject to local law or ordinance here in Missouri. And in any case, you could be denied entrance to the building by whoever has control over that building, and you would be obligated to comply or be subject to trespass charges.

you said "RSMO 571.107 then goes on to say that your CCW endorsement does not authorize (meaning that the state does not have the authority to authorize) you to carry into the 16 following places". Actually the law states that my CCW does not authorize me to carry CONCEALED into the 16 following places.

cshoff · Aug 17, 2010

HYRYSC said:
you said "RSMO 571.107 then goes on to say that your CCW endorsement does not authorize (meaning that the state does not have the authority to authorize) you to carry into the 16 following places". Actually the law states that my CCW does not authorize me to carry CONCEALED into the 16 following places.

Nor does it "authorize" you to carry firearms in any other manner into any of those places. The bottom line is, the state does not have the authority to tell those property owners that they MUST allow you to carry, in any manner, into those places. Only the person(s) with control/authority over those places can give you consent to carry in them; open, concealed, or otherwise. In other words, you can't walk into one of those places with your openly carried (or concealed) firearm and then point to your CCW permit as if it were some kind of a license to carry while you are there. That CCW permit means NOTHING to the people that control/have authority over those properties. If they don't want you and your firearm there, you must leave, period.

LMTD · Aug 17, 2010

cshoff said:
That CCW permit means NOTHING to the people that control/have authority over those properties. If they don't want you and your firearm there, you must leave, period.

Paraphrased Permitt = Permisson but NOT authority. The state can say you will not be charged with a crime for having a firearm but they can not grant you access or strip the right of the owner to say no you can not have a gun here.

Just like your own house, I might not be charged with a crime for entring your home if you invite me in, my having a gun on my person doing so is not a crime, but you can darn sure tell me to leave for any reason including simply that you do not want my gun in your home.

Having that gun concealed or in open view is of no value or reason regarding your wishes, you can kick me out either way, the most likely being OC as you will immediately likely see it.

If guns are not allowed in schools just because the CCW law addressed you may not carry concealed there by no means autorizes any other type of carry, the concealed law only addresses CONCEALED carry, there are other laws concerning whether or not a firearm or other weapons are allowed in schools. 571 is not the only weapons law in the state of missouri.

PT111 · Aug 17, 2010

I understand the OP's point and almost agree with him except for a catch in Section 571.107.

For example

(14) Any church or other place of religious worship without the consent of the minister or person or persons representing the religious organization that exercises control over the place of religious worship. Possession of a firearm in a vehicle on the premises 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;

Even if the interpretaion was that you could carry in those places due to having a permit then they could catch you on the part that a firearm cannot be removed from the vehicle. It is some interesting reading and could be used to fight a charge but I doubt that a judge would agree with you.

opencarryinmo · Aug 17, 2010

open carry in a school

as much as i would like to see open carry allowed in schools it is a hard arena to break, i would not suggest trying to push luck and attempt to carry in a school concealed or openly, and the point is a good one that if a school does they are said to be liable for the saftey of everyone in the building

LMTD · Aug 17, 2010

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.

cshoff · Aug 17, 2010

LMTD said:
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.

Exactly. The primary entity that regulates what can and can't be brought on to private property and in what manner, and by whom, is the person in charge of said private property. NOT the state, NOT the county, and NOT the local government. As I said above, the state doesn't have the authority to FORCE a private property to allow you on his/her property for any reason (except under rare, clearly defined circumstances). There is no such thing as a license or statute that allows a citizen to circumvent or otherwise ignore the wishes of the private property owner.

heresyourdipstickjimmy · Aug 17, 2010

Read the statute. (can't say it enough on this particular board for some reason)

A the bottom, Section 2, it specifically states that 1-17 shall not be a crime for CCW holders.

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

I had to educate SPD officers to this fact as they understood that it was illegal (a crime) for a CCW holder to carry on a college campus, which it clearly is not. The statute has a lot of "feel good" empowerment language to cover private property owners where no real power of enforcement exists, it makes them think there is when there is not.

cshoff · Aug 17, 2010

heresyourdipstickjimmy said:
Read the statute. (can't say it enough on this particular board for some reason)

A the bottom, Section 2, it specifically states that 1-17 shall not be a crime for CCW holders.

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

I had to educate SPD officers to this fact as they understood that it was illegal (a crime) for a CCW holder to carry on a college campus, which it clearly is not. The statute has a lot of "feel good" empowerment language to cover private property owners where no real power of enforcement exists, it makes them think there is when there is not.

This thread specifically talked about schools. While it is not unlawful under state law for a CCW permit holder to enter a school with a firearm, it would be under federal law.

TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I--CRIMES

CHAPTER 44--FIREARMS

Sec. 921. Definitions
.
.
.
(25) The term ``school zone'' means--
(A) in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private
school; or
(B) within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a
public, parochial or private school.

(26) The term ``school'' means a school which provides elementary or
secondary education, as determined under State law.

TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I--CRIMES

CHAPTER 44--FIREARMS

Sec. 922. Unlawful acts
.
.
.
(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.
(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm--
(i) on private property not part of school grounds;
(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;
(iii) that is--
(I) not loaded; and
(II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that
is on a motor vehicle;

(iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school
in the school zone;
(v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into
between a school in the school zone and the individual or an
employer of the individual;
(vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official
capacity; or
(vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while
traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to
public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school
premises is authorized by school authorities.

Note that a CCW permit in Missouri does not qualify as a license to possess a firearm in a school zone. In fact, the State of Missouri specifically acknowledges that your CCW endorsement does NOT authorize you to carry into any school in RSMO 571.107.1 (10). While I've not heard of anyone being prosecuted under this law, it's hard to say that the possibility does not exist.

heresyourdipstickjimmy · Aug 18, 2010

cshoff said:
This thread specifically talked about schools. While it is not unlawful under state law for a CCW permit holder to enter a school with a firearm, it would be under federal law.

Note that a CCW permit in Missouri does not qualify as a license to possess a firearm in a school zone. In fact, the State of Missouri specifically acknowledges that your CCW endorsement does NOT authorize you to carry into any school in RSMO 571.107.1 (10). While I've not heard of anyone being prosecuted under this law, it's hard to say that the possibility does not exist.

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.

Interesting Argument

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member