Missouri's nullification bill a sham!

[kcgunfan]

I think that's a reasonable conclusion. The MO statute making it possible for subdivisions to prohibit OC doesn't mention self defense either. Not everything can be addressed in a few paragraphs. As far as I know, the state preempts everything else anyways.

http://www.lenexa.com/assets/departments/police/pdfs/Open_Carry_Passed_Ordinance.pdf

No mention of self defense. Is this covered at the state level with no need to be redundant?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[OC for ME]

Yes, it can.

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:

6. Openly carries a firearm or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use;

B. Subparagraphs (1), (3), (4), (6) and (7) of Subsection (A) of this Section shall not apply to or affect any of the following: (LE exemption)

C. Subparagraphs (1), (5), (6) and (7) of Subsection (A) of this Section do not apply when the actor is transporting such weapons in a non-functioning state or in an unloaded state when ammunition is not readily accessible or when such weapons are not readily accessible. <snip>

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.

F. Nothing in this Section shall make it unlawful for a student to actually participate in school-sanctioned gun safety courses, <snip>

Clarity mitigates errors in education for both the state and the citizen. I recommend that the word of the city fathers not be taken at face value. Urge them to insert clarity into the city code. I didn't get OC when I brought it up at every counsil meeting for months and months, but I did get OC with a CCW endorsement. Is this a sham? I don't know, I don't get hassled by cops anymore. The state nullification bill with codify cops not disarming OCers just because they can in Missouri. I consider it a win anytime the state is burdened more than the citizen.....albeit a small win.

 

[OC for ME]

Yes, it can.Clarity mitigates errors in education for both the state and the citizen. I recommend that the word of the city fathers not be taken at face value. Urge them to insert clarity into the city code. I didn't get OC when I brought it up at every counsil meeting for months and months, but I did get OC with a CCW endorsement. Is this a sham? I don't know, I don't get hassled by cops anymore. The state nullification bill with codify cops not disarming OCers just because they can in Missouri. I consider it a win anytime the state is burdened more than the citizen.....albeit a small win.

Notice that RSMo 563.041 is not listed. I am working on getting it inserted into the city code.

 

[LMTD]

I pray that during conference committee one will take my advice and delete ALL of the OC reference and extra language that only confuses and invites debate and insert an edit into 21.750 deleting open carry from a regulated option. I do NOT want to see "discharge" deleted as it is already covered under our modified castle law and we do not need idiots setting up target practice in their 1/4 acre back yard.

I support the right to have, and carry your firearm at anytime, any way you want, in any place you are legally able to be. Discharge of that firearm in self defense should never be regulated but believe that discharge within 300 meters of a dwelling you do not own, unless on an approved range to be a reasonable regulation for target practice or recreational shooting as long as it is capped with a large fine for violation and not a loss of freedom on first offense.

Your opinions may vary

 

[Renegadez]

Kansas is done Guberner signed

Well brownback did it so hope we can get it done here in MO. I see alot of discussion on OC'in but I was thinking this bill was more about limiting the feds and OC was just throw in there?

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?119756-Kansas-A-Gold-Star-Open-Carry-State

 

[kcgunfan]

Well, we discuss OC'in a lot, because that's what we're here for. There are plenty of other places discussing other aspects of the bill. But, you are right, the primary focus of the bill is the federal nullification. There are a number of those things thrown in, and the OC piece is really one of those.

Well brownback did it so hope we can get it done here in MO. I see alot of discussion on OC'in but I was thinking this bill was more about limiting the feds and OC was just throw in there?

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?119756-Kansas-A-Gold-Star-Open-Carry-State

 

[Renegadez]

No Vote today!

Everyone interested in this bill should sign up here Ron does a great job of keeping us informed and helping to get witness forms and such done.

http://www.mofirst.org/

In fact I received an email from this morning which do not contain good news about the progress of the bill here it is.

_________________________________________

I SHOULD be reporting to you the final passage of the Second Amendment Preservation Act. I SHOULD be telling you that both the House and Senate have done their part and that the bill is on the Governor's desk, beginning the 15 day window for him to either veto or sign.

But I CAN'T report that good news because it hasn't happened, even though it COULD have.

Nine precious days have passed since the Senate General Laws Committee held the final public hearing and recommended that HB 1439 “do pass”. It took until April 23rd for the Pro Tem to place the bill on the calendar for debate before the full Senate.

Recall that this is the House version of the bill, so although it has been through the entire process in the House, it had to start over in the Senate. It needs one more approval vote in the Senate and then another vote in the House, since the bill has been changed since the House last voted on it.

The Senate vote could have – should have – happened today. The Senate even quit early this morning.

I'm not even sure WHY the bill wasn't taken up today, but I'm sure the latest proposal by Senator Brad Lager to add new language didn't help. The additions necessitated yet another re-drafting just about the time it should have been going to the floor for that final vote.

If there's any hope of overriding a gubernatorial veto by the end of the legislative session, rather than having to wait for the September veto override session, the Second Amendment Preservation Act must be passed and on the Governor's desk by the drop-dead date of May 1st. The last day of session is May 16th .

What can you do at this point?

Call YOUR OWN Senator and Representative and tell them how important it is to you to see the Second Amendment Preservation Act passed before May 1st. Ask them to tell House and Senate leadership that the folks back home want the bill across the finish line!

(Our records show the following to be your Rep and Senator, but our records aren't perfect. Please forgive me if we have it wrong.)

Representative:
Donna Pfautsch
Donna.Pfautsch@house.mo.gov
URL: http://www.house.mo.gov/member.aspx?year=2014&district=033

Senator:
Will Kraus
Will.Kraus@mail.senate.mo.gov
URL: http://www.senate.mo.gov/14info/members/mem08.htm





For liberty,

- Ron

--

And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works. -- Frédéric Bastiat - "The Law"

Ron Calzone, director
Missouri First, Inc.
ron@mofirst.org
http://www.mofirst.org
_______________________________________________

 

[Redbaron007]

Well........

HB1439 is on the formal calendar, again, today for a third vote and passage out of the Senate. Lets hope it gets there! If you haven't, contact your reps today.

EDIT: Also, SJR36 is on the House Calendar today for third reading, too.

Thanks!

 

[OC for ME]

Time is running out.....contact your elected reps every day.

 

[kcgunfan]

Well, it passed last night, with amendments of course. At least the amendments weren't bad once. I don't think the House will have too much heartache over them. Well, I'm sure there will be some posturing and delaying, but I'm sure we're in the home stretch.

Time is running out.....contact your elected reps every day.

 

[Redbaron007]

Well, it passed last night, with amendments of course. At least the amendments weren't bad once. I don't think the House will have too much heartache over them. Well, I'm sure there will be some posturing and delaying, but I'm sure we're in the home stretch.

It did make it through.....however, if da gubbinor sticks to his liberal Obama/Holder thinking, then the veto session in September won't come soon enough! As a lame duck liberal politician...who knows which way he will go. :banghead: I betting it won't be 'For the People'.

 

[Great Gazoo]

Of course there will be a veto. Following the veto there will be behind the scenes bribery, thuggery, intimidation, deception and illegally unfilled legislative seats to ensure a failed overide. Similar to last year. Our hopes will be greater when a more friendly governor is seated. That is why I have been pursuing the removal of Nixon. If he were to be removed from office this year would the Lt Gov be sworn in? That would clear the way for a success next year.

 

[kcgunfan]

Well, it's on the House calendar for third read Monday. I expect final passage.

 

[WalkingWolf]

I am soooo glad I do not live in MO! The road to gun control is paved with baby steps.

It amazes how many otherwise freedom loving people accept tyranny as a improvement. Good luck guys, because it looks like you are one step closer to licensed only OC.

 

[kcgunfan]

Since the original poster was not able to explain what his objection was to the bill, would you mind explaining yours please?

I am soooo glad I do not live in MO! The road to gun control is paved with baby steps.

It amazes how many otherwise freedom loving people accept tyranny as a improvement. Good luck guys, because it looks like you are one step closer to licensed only OC.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Since the original poster was not able to explain what his objection was to the bill, would you mind explaining yours please?

As long as I don't travel to MO I have no problem. Obviously you have no problem with government controlling your privileges, because they are not rights if you have to beg for them. The bill is clearly a step towards outlawing unlicensed OC in the whole state, just a baby step to get there. If you cannot see that, then you deserve the consequences. Seems you are OK with that though, Ben Franklin had a famous quote on the subject of giving up freedom for privileges.

If they REALLY wanted to protect the right, the link to a privilege card would not be there. Seems they have a good number of the population in MO. bamboozled.

PT Barnum says...

 

[OC for ME]

As long as I don't travel to MO I have no problem. Obviously you have no problem with government controlling your privileges, because they are not rights if you have to beg for them. The bill is clearly a step towards outlawing unlicensed OC in the whole state, just a baby step to get there. If you cannot see that, then you deserve the consequences. Seems you are OK with that though, Ben Franklin had a famous quote on the subject of giving up freedom for privileges.

If they REALLY wanted to protect the right, the link to a privilege card would not be there. Seems they have a good number of the population in MO. bamboozled.

PT Barnum says...

Very insightful. If a out-of-stater can see it...

+10 WW

 

[kcgunfan]

If you are not following Missouri very carefully, I can see how you could get this impression. But it's incorrect. Out of all the lines in this bill, about 3 of the lines extend the open carrying of firearms to political subdivisions that ban it. This is an increase in privileges for those with CCW Permits, but it in no way affects the rights of those without a CCW permit. That's what it boils down to, nothing more than that.

Here's some other things that the bill does:

1. It basically removes Missouri from the NFA, GCA, and GFSZ federal laws. That is, of course, going to go through a huge court battle, and it may very well not be successful. But, I don't see Wisconsin doing that. Seems like you're OK with that though.

2. It provides an option for primary and secondary staff to be armed inside of their schools. I don't see Wisconsin doing that. Seems like you're OK with that though.

3. Also, in SJR36, the legislature is proposing several changes to our Missouri Constitution to provide for the following:

a. Remove the clause that says it doesn't justify the carrying of concealed weapons.
b. Make sure that we don't only have a right to firearms, but also ammunition, and accessories.
c. Make it explicit that we have right to provide for the defense of our families.
d. Make it explicit that all court reviews on our right to carry be performed with strict scrutiny.
e. Obligate the State to not only uphold these rights, but also defend against their infringement.

This is up for third reading and final passage in the House Monday. If it passes there, it goes to the people for a final vote. I'll be very surprised if it's not up for a vote in November. Has Wisconsin done this?

By far, the arc in Missouri politics is a liberalizing of firearm laws since we passed Concealed Carry. If you have different results in your state, then you have my sympathies.

Can you please explain how, keeping in mind what you just read, this is a baby step toward outlawing unlicensed OC in the whole state? I'm not sure how that works. I don't accept Chicken Little statements on their surface from anyone. Please be specific, I'm stupid.

As long as I don't travel to MO I have no problem. Obviously you have no problem with government controlling your privileges, because they are not rights if you have to beg for them. The bill is clearly a step towards outlawing unlicensed OC in the whole state, just a baby step to get there. If you cannot see that, then you deserve the consequences. Seems you are OK with that though, Ben Franklin had a famous quote on the subject of giving up freedom for privileges.

If they REALLY wanted to protect the right, the link to a privilege card would not be there. Seems they have a good number of the population in MO. bamboozled.

PT Barnum says...

 

[WalkingWolf]

There is no wall of text, IMO that changes that it is wrong to change a right to a privilege. The bill is for privileges ONLY! Clearly the MO legislature had made fools of the constituents.

 

[kcgunfan]

If you can't read my small wall of text, then I'm sure you didn't bother to read all of HB1439. As a result have no idea what you are talking about. Is that short enough?

There is no wall of text, IMO that changes that it is wrong to change a right to a privilege. The bill is for privileges ONLY! Clearly the MO legislature had made fools of the constituents.