Missouri's Approved Gun Bills: Concealed-Carry Permits Easier to Get, Record-Keeping Banned

CCW image 1.jpg
via
The legislative session in Missouri is finally over. And after months of heated debates on guns, lawmakers have sent controversial bills to the governor that would dramatically change the concealed-carry permit application process -- and increase protections for gun owners.

That is, these bills make it easier for residents to get gun permits in the state and eliminate a major record-keeping component of the current process. The GOP is now celebrating these successful legislative feats, passed in the name of protecting the privacy of gun owners. As we've reported, critics say this pro-privacy agenda could actually make Missouri more vulnerable to fraud, terrorism and other criminal activity.

If the governor were to sign these bills, how would gun laws change in the state?

For starters, Senate Bill 75 would reform the concealed-carry process so that local sheriffs would solely handle the permit approvals, and the state license bureau would not be involved.

This move in part derives from an intense backlash against the Missouri Department of Revenue's licensing agency for allegedly scanning, retaining -- and shipping off to outside organizations and to the feds -- personal information of those seeking concealed-carry permits. The shift in the process, Republican supporters say, ensures that Missourians will not end up on some gun-control-inspired gun registry organized by Democratic governor Jay Nixon in cooperation with the White House.

Eliminating the department of revenue from this process, as we've noted, means that the permit application will be quicker, with the removal of a final step involving an endorsement at the state level.

missouri-concealed-carry-permit.jpg
via
Missouri concealed-carry permit endorsement in question.

"This is an important change in the CCW process...with the goal of preventing the state revenue department from ever again sharing the personal information of permit holders with the federal government," State Representative Eric Burlison, a Springfield Republican, says in a statement sent out by the Missouri GOP. "This is a common-sense change that empowers our sheriffs to not only issue a certificate of qualification for a permit, but to actually take sole responsibility for the process by issuing permits. It's a move that will give the people of Missouri confidence that the process will not violate their rights."

At the same time, the Missouri legislature also sent Senate Bill 252 to the governor which bans the Department of Revenue altogether from retaining documents of those who get IDs from the state.

These two bills combined, it seems, would ensure that officials at the state level would not have lists of those with gun permits and would not have records on file relating to these applicants.

State Senator Kurt Schaefer, a Republican from Columbia, praises the passage of SB 75 as a move to eliminate unneeded bureaucracy from the gun process.

"SB 75 is an important piece of legislation that will streamline the conceal carry process, while removing unnecessary bureaucracy from the process by allowing Missouri's sheriff department to handle the permits," he says in a statement. "This process is ideal to ensuring each individual's privacy is protected."

Senator Dan Brown, a Republican from Rolla, hopes that SB75 -- which he sponsored and initially earned him national mockery -- would also encourage school districts to create "active shooting training programs."

Debates around armed teachers and gun training for students, it seems, were somewhat drowned out by discussions of gun owner privacy in Missouri, but the version of this bill on the governor's desk does encourage gun safety and intruder-response lessons in classrooms. It also says, "School personnel and program instructors shall not make value judgments about firearms."

Continue for more on the GOP's successful gun bills in Missouri this session.

My Voice Nation Help
36 comments
aaron.lorton
aaron.lorton

All because of the feverish, right-wing, disembrained backlash over the POSSIBILITY of expanding background checks after Sandy Hook. Simply amazing. Overreach/overreact much?

ArchAngel89
ArchAngel89

Reading the comments, I applaud all of my conservative friends.. But this IS the RFT.. Not exactly the bastion of intelligent, logical thought.  Its a mouthpiece for the borg (aka Liberals).. Keep up the good fight and let Sam here keep up his love affair with ole Rachel on MSNBC.. Good luck with that one Sam, unless your full name is Samantha.. Its going to be a very one-sided affair. 

ArchAngel89
ArchAngel89

Reading the comments, I applaud all of my conservative friends.. But this IS the RFT.. Not exactly the bastion of intelligent, logical thought.  Its a mouthpiece for the borg aka.. Liberals.. Keep up the good fight and let Sam here keep up his love affair with ole Rachel on MSNBC.. Good luck with that one Sam, unless your full name is Samantha.. Its going to be a very one-sided affair. 

michellecapelli
michellecapelli

now its on a sherrifs level the person who just got out still would be denied because the sherrifs dept would review his record. The paper process is the loong part of sending the paper work away and waiting months to get approved. now the local sherrifs dept has the ability to review the records and approve or deny ppl

hga1
hga1

"and eliminate a major record-keeping component of the current process."

The author is ignoring that the true "major record-keeping component" of the current system is putting it into the law enforcement MULES system ... which we can presume has safeguards against abusive fishing expeditions.  There's absolutely no reason the DoR needs to keep after the fact records of CCW endorsements except to abuse them. 

Courtni674
Courtni674

"record keeping banned"....so when a rapist or murderer gets out, they can just go ahead and go buy a gun again with no records behind them to say "this guy shouldn't get a gun"? Please tell me I read that wrong...

rheike12
rheike12

TO TAKE AWAY OUR GUNS IS TO TAKE AWAY YOUR RIGHTS, IF WE ALLOW ONE THEY WILL ALL GO. PEOPLE WAKE UP WE LIVE IN ONE OF THE WORLDS MOST FREE SOCIOTIES. YES PEOPLE GUNS ARE USED TO KILL MILLIONS DAILY, BUT IF WERE GONNA BAN GUNS THEN LETS BAN CIGGARETTES,CARS, MOTORCYCLES, CIGARS, ALCAHOL, AND EVERY OTHER FREEDOM WE HAVE, MATER OF FACT WHY NOT JUST BECOME NORT KOREA,!!!!! AS YOU CRITISIZE LEGAL HONEST GUN OWNING CITIZENS INSTEAD OF SEEKING TO OBSERVE AND CORRECT MENTAL HEALH ISSUES IN THIS COUNTRY, YOU MAY WANT TO CHANGE YOUR OUTLOOK AND MOTIVES BEFORE YOU DISARM A NEIBHOR OR CITIZEN THAT WOULD PROTECT YOU IN A HEART BEAT WITH THAT SAME GUN IF YOUR LIFE WERE THREATENED OR YOU FAMILY WAS IN DANGER....

Lars Smith
Lars Smith

Also I love the suggestion that the DMV is no longer allowed to shield the public from the excesses and largesse of the County Sheriff's Dept. WHATEVER SHALL WE DO?

Lars Smith
Lars Smith

Considering that, depending on the state/study, CCW holders are 4-25x less likely to commit a violent crime than another otherwise identical citizen, that sounds like good news to me.

Blake Harris
Blake Harris

I lived in CO where the sheriff issues the permits, what's the problem? Oh... You're trying to manufacture one.. got it.

Peter Hanson
Peter Hanson

The only way this makes getting concealed carry permits easier is by skipping the step of having to go to the DMV. The DMV just took your paperwork and your picture and gave you an ID. It was a hassle for sure, but it's not like they were performing any checks at that point. They strictly played the role of giving you an ID, the local sheriffs department has always been the organization that performs the background checks and approves or denies applicants. The Dept of Revenue never performed that, they just issued you a picture ID with a CCW stamp on it.

Peter Hanson
Peter Hanson

That's an interesting scenario and would make a great scene in a TV show, but not one backed up by statistics in this country. CCW holders getting shot while trying to draw a gun to defend themselves is so rare as to be an anomaly.

Derek Parker
Derek Parker

First page. "Gun Permits". Something that is non-existent in this state.

Thee Lovingcup
Thee Lovingcup

Keep reading ::: "This is an important change in the CCW process...

Thee Lovingcup
Thee Lovingcup

You should take a self defense class, learn what you don't think you already know.

Donald Creswell
Donald Creswell

if a bad guy robbing you on the street has the drop on you with his gun pointed at you with finger on trigger, and you beging to reach for your concealed weapon, i dont really see how your concealed-carry permission slip is going to help you considering 1nce you start to reach for your weapon bad guy is going to blast you. now you're just as robbed, plus you're dead, and the bad guy now has 2 guns instead of one.

Derek Parker
Derek Parker

There are no "gun permits" in this state. You either pass the NCIS check, or you don't. Permits are issued for concealed carry. This article is laced with biased bullshit. At least educate yourself on the subject if you insist on writing about it.

Pane Tentracer
Pane Tentracer

Proud to live here and proud to have participated in these successes.

12judges
12judges

It is ridiculous that these pieces of legislation were even necessary.  Necessary not because the systems were broken but because someone (Dept. of Revenue) fucked up big time in sharing private information only necessary at the state level with the Feds.  The federal government has NOTHING TO DO WITH STATE'S CCW PERMITTING PROCESSES WHATSOEVER.  To share that information was an overextension of authority that did not exist and that those charged with keeping information private couldn't be trusted.

How many times do we have to say it?  STOP DEMONIZING GUN OWNERS AND CCW HOLDERS AND TREATING US LIKE CRIMINALS.  There are millions of us.  We are decent people that would protect you as much as ourselves.  We are not going away and we will protect our rights.

bossmanham
bossmanham

I love how the author cites Rachel Maddow as some sort of authority on the subject, and makes sure to mention how leftists mocked pro gun bills.

Haha. Real balanced stuff here.

Chad
Chad

"Eliminating the department of revenue from this process, as we've noted, means that the permit application will be quicker, with the removal of a final step involving an endorsement at the state level."


Oh BS. 

I have a CCW. Once I had my paperwork from the police, I walked 15 feet to the license Bureau and they printed me license with the endorsement on it in less than 5 minutes. 

I don't know what you are getting at here anyway. Are you trying to say that tying up folks in unnecessary delays and government Bureaucracy because 'guns are spooky' is a good thing?  Once you have the paperwork from the police - you are done anyway. The DMV is merely protocol today, there is no checks done there and they have no option but to print the endorsement, they are afforded no discretion under the law in that regard. 

This is some lazy ass reporting sir. Next time take the time to understand the facts before you go off all half cocked. 





hga1
hga1

@aaron.lorton No, all because the Feds, on a fishing expedition, asked the Highway Patrol for a list of *every* Missouri concealed carry licensee---although not so officially they were willing to put the request in writing, as is standard for obvious reasons---and the DoR without a asking any questions supplied it, all 160,000 names and identifying information.  The Feds claim they never could read these lists, for what that's worth, but the president is obvious, especially with everyone in Nixon's administration claiming all this was legal.

It's not wise to argue with a legislature over what they thought they made illegal in very plain language.  Oh, yeah, they also stonewalled and resisted admitting this every step of the way, and often lied about it, although I don't think any perjury was committed.

So this is in response to a real abuse that happened long before Sandy Hook, and the legislation makes sure it can never happen again by limiting the info to sheriffs' offices and MULES.  Any claims this is an overreaction to background checks---which I'll remind you are very serious for Missouri concealed carry licenses, including sending your fingerprints to the FBI (none of that is changing)---is either based on ignorance of the above or a peculiar  tolerance for government abuse.

bushwacker2010
bushwacker2010

@Courtni674 This is in correct if they have a criminal record it will show up in the background check. 

dcso600
dcso600

@Courtni674 You read that wrong, MULES and NCIC will still have records of convitions


hga1
hga1

This has nothing to do with simply buying guns; if they've committed a felony, the state has reported them to National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) which used by gun dealers to check for disqualified would be buyers.

As I mention elsewhere, CCW is reported to the MULES system, plus the local sheriff keeps track of the one in his county and revokes them temporarily or permanently as needed, which is also required by the current law.  

mkheadley49
mkheadley49

@Courtni674 These people don't buy their guns in the regular way anyway. They get them on the street from other criminals....and it's the conceal carry permit that is at the option of the local Sheriff, not the purchase of the weapon.

Chad
Chad

@Donald L. Creswell 


Oh wow. Never thought of that Donald. Since that is ONE possibility, I guess nobody should have guns to defend themselves at all. 


Solid thinking. 



hga1
hga1

@Donald L. Creswell People are smart enough to not go for their concealed weapons when "a bad guy robbing you on the street has the drop on" them.  Fortunately that's a rare minority of cases, and generally starts with a failure of situational awareness.  You don't have to read very many of these cases to find that citizen concealed carry works a whole lot of the time.

mach
mach

@Chad I got mine and then had to drive 6 miles to the DMV, wait in a 20 min line, then was told that I had to have a Birth Cert or Passport. When I came back, again waited in line 30 minutes or so, I was told in addition to the Cert, I ALSO had to have proof of residency. This is after the FBI and MHP had researched me. I was told this was effective the day I came in the first time but was not told. I think this is a good thing and would have saved me TWO TRIPS to DMV. Just sayin...

smdrpepper
smdrpepper

@bushwacker2010 @Courtni674 Ahh. but as we have been seeing more and more, criminal and mental problems are NOT showing up in the standard background check because the system is seriously flawed.  The Navy Yard shooter bought a shotgun legally two days before despite several "minor gun crimes" and severe mental problems he had displayed over the years.

Now Trending

St. Louis Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...