• 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.

For those not watching everything going on OC with a permit passed

kcgunfan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,004
Location
KC
And lowering of CCW permit to 19, and OCv restriction removed, and school protection officers. Everything in SAPA, but SAPA.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
 

LMTD

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,919
Location
, ,
Yep, govs desk, should know by mid July.

Since this is the same as last year less nullification and nullification was his objection he is in a rock and hard place, I am wondering if he won't just ignore and let it expire and move along. Seems a veto might be bad timing for him but you never know.
 

bigb360

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
29
Location
Independence
So this bill doe not stop the feds from confiscation or any other thing they want?

Nope. It's a bs useless piece of garbage that a veto proof majority screwed up. These idiots have blown our shot at this. Gives me another reason to move to Kansas.
 

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
Nope. It's a bs useless piece of garbage that a veto proof majority screwed up. These idiots have blown our shot at this. Gives me another reason to move to Kansas.

Actually, this bill was not screwed up....it is what it is. It never contained an element SAPA.

Please tell me what is useless about this bill? Lowering the age to CCW? Allow schools to have teachers trained as School Protection Officers? Voiding local ordinances on OCing (with a CCW)?

If you are criticizing the bill because there is no SAPA; then you need to research and see which bills contained SAPA. I'll help you a little; try HB1439 and SB613.

Plain and simple, the nullification of federal laws and/or charges against Fed LEOs is very touchy with most states legislatures. This is no exception to MO. The SJR36 that is going to be on the ballot this fall will help (in my opinion) push SAPA through. If the voters of MO approve; this will help a great deal in securing continuity for the years to come in 2A legal battles. And hopefully, it will encourage legislators to enact a better SAPA.
 

Firepit1x

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Messages
16
Location
Labadie
Guess What Just Landed on my Desk?

I work for St. Louis County Justice Services and what they call "Request for fiscal impact" for TAFP ....SB 656 (5082-04) just hit my email this morning.
These go out to administrators of any affected departments, school districts and the like to get our input for how the proposed law might impact us financially, operationally or otherwise. Sometimes they ask for Urgent Input to speak against or for a bill....but this one they did not.
My supervisor was somewhat surprised that I already had full knowledge of this bill and the changes being proposed and probably wasn't expecting the earful that I gave him on the open carry side of it. The only input I had, because like it or not, facilities like ours have become the new mental health institutions thanks to the closing of several mental health facilities in MO under former Gov. Holden's watch.....was the this:

No health care professional licensed in this state shall use an electronic medical record program that requires, in order to complete and save a medical record, entry of data regarding whether a patient owns, has access to, or lives in a home containing a firearm.

My suggestion was simply: Pay attention to the health care wording!

I've attached the proposed law for easy access and because mine is 35 pages compared to the 28 page one attached in the first post (not sure what was added beside the header page) but I'm guessing most of us have read/reviewed it.

View attachment 5082S.04T.pdf
 
Last edited:

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
I work for St. Louis County Justice Services and what they call "Request for fiscal impact" for TAFP ....SB 656 (5082-04) just hit my email this morning.
These go out to administrators of any affected departments, school districts and the like to get our input for how the proposed law might impact us financially, operationally or otherwise. Sometimes they ask for Urgent Input to speak against or for a bill....but this one they did not.
My supervisor was somewhat surprised that I already had full knowledge of this bill and the changes being proposed and probably wasn't expecting the earful that I gave him on the open carry side of it. The only input I had, because like it or not, facilities like ours have become the new mental health institutions thanks to the closing of several mental health facilities in MO under former Gov. Holden's watch.....was the this:

No health care professional licensed in this state shall use an electronic medical record program that requires, in order to complete and save a medical record, entry of data regarding whether a patient owns, has access to, or lives in a home containing a firearm.

My suggestion was simply: Pay attention to the health care wording!

I've attached the proposed law for easy access and because mine is 35 pages compared to the 28 page one attached in the first post (not sure what was added beside the header page) but I'm guessing most of us have read/reviewed it.

View attachment 11642

Thanks....I forgot about the healthcare professional verbiage, too!
 

plumberdan

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2013
Messages
10
Location
st,louis
glad about open carry..leo says he always disarms to check serial number


encounter with local leo in st. Louis muni..officer says he always disarms ccw people so he

can run serial number...what's with that..I informed him with new bill in legislation that would be

an unlawfull act to disarm with out making arrest merely for snooping purpose of valid ccw carriers,

and could lead to lawsuit against officer with out his being able to hide behind immunity....

please comment about what to say when told they want to check your weapon for serial number

to show not stolen firearm...thanks for all the good work in getting us here...wonder how st. Louis city

will act after new law is signed or let become valid by inaction
 

9026543

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
509
Location
Southern MO
Nothing will change until they get several large lawsuits slapped on their ass and have to pay out several thousand of the taxpayers and insurance company dollars.
 

kylemoul

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2011
Messages
640
Location
st louis
encounter with local leo in st. Louis muni..officer says he always disarms ccw people so he

can run serial number...what's with that..I informed him with new bill in legislation that would be

an unlawfull act to disarm with out making arrest merely for snooping purpose of valid ccw carriers,

and could lead to lawsuit against officer with out his being able to hide behind immunity....

please comment about what to say when told they want to check your weapon for serial number

to show not stolen firearm...thanks for all the good work in getting us here...wonder how st. Louis city

will act after new law is signed or let become valid by inaction

Easy...no reason to tell a LEO that you are armed if you are carrying concealed. Period. This is the exact reason why.
You are being stripped of your firearm and 2A rights, and being treated as guilty until he can run a serial number to prove innocence.

The above is what I usually tell others.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,453
Location
White Oak Plantation
The mere sight of a gun is not RAS that the gun is stolen. Being disarmed by cops comes with carry. Actually being disarmed is a very rare occurrence here in MO to my knowledge.

Record the encounter and pursue legal action if appropriate.
 

bigb360

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
29
Location
Independence
Actually, this bill was not screwed up....it is what it is. It never contained an element SAPA.

Please tell me what is useless about this bill? Lowering the age to CCW? Allow schools to have teachers trained as School Protection Officers? Voiding local ordinances on OCing (with a CCW)?

If you are criticizing the bill because there is no SAPA; then you need to research and see which bills contained SAPA. I'll help you a little; try HB1439 and SB613.

Plain and simple, the nullification of federal laws and/or charges against Fed LEOs is very touchy with most states legislatures. This is no exception to MO. The SJR36 that is going to be on the ballot this fall will help (in my opinion) push SAPA through. If the voters of MO approve; this will help a great deal in securing continuity for the years to come in 2A legal battles. And hopefully, it will encourage legislators to enact a better SAPA.

It was the fall back bill. I'm well aware of the differences. Doesn't matter if we're not committed to upholding the constitution in light of federal overreach.
 

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
It was the fall back bill. I'm well aware of the differences. Doesn't matter if we're not committed to upholding the constitution in light of federal overreach.

Yep.....it was a backup bill...so was HB1439....SB613 was the leader early on to pass.

If...and I mean IF the gubbinor signs it...it will provide less issues next session; a less complicated SAPA bill can be brought up and debated; especially if SJR36 is passed by the voters this Fall. Then you will really see who is for 2A rights or not!
 
Top