HCS HB 349, 120, 136 & 328 -- CONCEALED FIREARMS

SPONSOR:  Mayer (Crawford)

COMMITTEE ACTION:  Voted "do pass" by the Committee on Crime
Prevention and Public Safety by a vote of 15 to 3.

This substitute allows individuals to carry concealed firearms.
The substitute establishes a procedure for obtaining an
endorsement on a person's driver's license that entitles the
person to carry a concealed firearm.  Sheriffs will issue
certificates of qualification to applicants who meet the
requirements for obtaining the endorsement, which include
training in the use of firearms, a background check, and the
payment of a fee.  The substitute also creates the county
sheriff's revolving fund, in which the fees for these
endorsements will be deposited.  Any money in a county sheriff's
revolving fund may be expended at the direction of the sheriff
without prior approval of the governing board of the county.

The substitute sets forth the qualifications necessary to acquire
a certificate of qualification and a procedure by which the
certificate must be granted by county sheriffs to anyone meeting
the qualifications.  The Department of Revenue will issue a new
driver's or nondriver's license containing the concealed firearms
endorsement to the applicant.  Concealed carry endorsements will
be valid for three years.

QUALIFICATIONS FOR OBTAINING A CONCEALED CARRY ENDORSEMENT

To qualify for the certificate needed to acquire a concealed
carry endorsement, individuals must:

(1)  Be at least 21 years of age;

(2)  Be a citizen of the United States;

(3)  Have resided in Missouri for at least six months or be a
military member, or the spouse of a military member, stationed in
Missouri;

(4)  Not have been found guilty of a felony;

(5)  Not have been found guilty, in the five years preceding the
application, of a misdemeanor involving a crime of violence or
two misdemeanors involving either alcohol-related driving
offenses or possession of a controlled substance;

(6)  Not be a fugitive from justice;

(7)  Not be currently charged with a felony;

(8)  Not be dishonorably discharged from the armed forces;

(9)  Not have engaged in a pattern of behavior, documented in
public records, that causes the sheriff to have a reasonable
belief that the applicant presents a danger to himself or others;

(10)  Not have been adjudged mentally incompetent or released
from a mental health facility for five years prior to the
application;

(11)  Not be the respondent in a valid full order of protection
currently in effect;

(12)  Be fingerprinted;

(13)  Clear a criminal background check by the state and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation; and

(14)  Comply with training requirements set forth in the
substitute.

TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

Applicants for a concealed carry endorsement must complete a
firearms safety course provided by an instructor certified by a
state or federal law enforcement agency or the National Rifle
Association.  The substitute specifies the required curriculum,
which includes classroom work and live firing exercises.  The
substitute also sets forth the training required for the
certification of a firearms safety instructor.  Instructors must
keep their course records available for at least four years.
Instructors who provide false information about the performance
of an applicant in the training program are guilty of a class C
misdemeanor.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

Sheriffs in first classification counties may authorize police
chiefs in the municipalities within their county to process
applications for certificates of qualification.  Sheriffs must
reimburse the municipalities for the reasonable expenses incurred
as a result.

Sheriffs must request the criminal background check within three
working days of the submission of the completed application and
must issue a certificate of qualification to the applicant within
three days of the receipt of the completed background check.
Sheriffs may issue a certificate without a federal criminal
background check if the background check has not been received
within 45 days.  Sheriffs may deny an application if there is
reason to believe an applicant lied on the application.  Denials
must be communicated in writing, state the grounds for denial,
and inform the applicant of the right to amend and resubmit the
application for a 30-day period.  The substitute sets forth an
appeal form and a process by which the sheriff will re-examine an
amended application and, if still not approved, the applicant may
appeal through the small claims court.  Sheriffs must keep
records of all applications and report the issuance of all
certificates of qualification to the Missouri Uniform Law
Enforcement System (MULES).  Application fees may not exceed
$100, and renewal fees may not exceed $50.

The application must contain a conspicuous warning that false
statements will constitute perjury, a class D felony.  Any person
attempting to transfer, alter, or use the certificate of
qualification of another person or otherwise obtain a concealed
firearm endorsement through false representation is guilty of a
class A misdemeanor.  Endorsements issued to anyone who later
fails to meet any of the requirements will be suspended or
revoked.  An endorsement holder must notify the department within
30 days of changing his or her name or address.  Endorsement
holders who have their endorsement revoked may petition the small
claims court for reinstatement.  Any person aggrieved by a final
decision in small claims court may petition the associate circuit
court for a trial de novo.  The court, upon a finding that a
plaintiff brought an action against an endorsement holder without
a reasonable basis and with an intent to harass the endorsement
holder, may assess all costs and fees to the plaintiff, including
attorney fees, which are presumed to be $150 per hour.

LIMITATIONS ON WHERE CONCEALED FIREARMS MAY BE CARRIED

Endorsements to carry a concealed firearm are not valid in many
places, including:  police stations; polling places on election
day; correctional facilities; courthouses; airports; bars;
schools; child care facilities; hospitals; stadiums; amusement
parks; gambling facilities; churches; any place where the
carrying of a firearm is prohibited by federal law; the meeting
place of any elected officials (except for the elected officials
themselves who have endorsements); or any privately owned
property where the owner has posted that the premises is
off-limits to concealed firearms.  The substitute also allows
governmental units to limit concealed firearms in their public
buildings.  Violating prohibitions on carrying concealed firearms
in certain locations is grounds for being denied access to or
being removed from the premises.  Frequent violators are subject
to monetary penalties and endorsement suspensions.

UNLAWFUL USE OF A WEAPON

The substitute also changes the crime of unlawful use of a
weapon.  The substitute:

(1)  Removes the prohibition on the carrying of a firearm into
any public gathering;

(2)  Allows a person who lawfully possesses a concealable firearm
to transport the firearm in the passenger compartment of a motor
vehicle; and

(3)  Increases the penalty for possessing a firearm while
intoxicated.  Under current law, it is class B misdemeanor.  The
substitute makes it a class A misdemeanor if the gun is not
loaded and a class D felony if it is loaded.

FISCAL NOTE:  Estimated Net Cost to General Revenue Fund of
$152,890 in FY 2004, $184,525 in FY 2005, and $189,731 in FY
2006.  Estimated Net Income to Criminal Records System Fund of
$494,201 in FY 2004, $475,595 in FY 2005, and $469,961 in FY
2006.  Estimated Net Cost to Highway Fund of $47,800 in FY 2004,
$0 in FY 2005, and $0 in FY 2006.

PROPONENTS:  Supporters say that Missouri is one of just six
states that do not allow citizens to acquire a permit to carry a
concealed firearm.  Personal safety and the basic right of
self-protection are the reasons behind this legislation.  The law
would not result in more gun-related crime.  Instead, it actually
reduces crime.  Texas and Florida have enacted similar
legislation and have reported reductions in a variety of crimes
against persons.  In Texas, aggravated assaults dropped 7%,
forcible rapes dropped 5%, and murders dropped 8% in the years
after legislation was enacted.  Officials in Florida contend that
tourists became a popular target for criminals because they could
not carry concealed firearms, unlike Florida residents.  People
who live in rural areas can't rely upon law enforcement to
protect them all the time, because there are too few deputies
covering a large geographical area.  The problem is even worse
now, with budget problems forcing many sheriff's offices to make
cutbacks.  When methamphetamine dealers set up labs in the woods
nearby, and the closest sheriff's deputy is a half hour away, a
person needs to be able to protect himself.

Testifying for the bill were Representatives Crawford, Sander,
Munzlinger, Barnitz, and Jetton; Jessica Sparks; National Rifle
Association; Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance; Missouri Family
Network; Susan Rowden; and Second Amendment Coalition.

OPPONENTS:  Those who oppose the bill say that the claims that
laws allowing concealed-carry have led to reductions in crime
have not been proven by empirical data.  The reliability of the
data in publications by John Lott has been called into question
by a number of critics.  Crime has decreased everywhere, not just
in those states that have enacted concealed-carry laws.  The
voters in Missouri are probably the most educated group in the
country on this issue, since it has been debated and voted upon
in a public referendum.  The public has already voted against
this issue.  The bill will increase the number of handguns in
Missouri and; consequently, it will increase the number of
handguns in criminals' hands (because they steal them from gun
owners), and it will result in more deaths and injuries from
accidental shootings (because so many handguns are cheaply made
and will misfire, fire when they are dropped, don't have a
safety, etc.).  The bill is also flawed in several areas.  For
example, the training required in the bill is inadequate, and the
records (such as mental health records, or domestic violence
incident reports) the sheriffs are supposed to have access to
simply aren't always available in the current system.

Testifying against the bill were Missouri Impact; Million Mom
March; Richard Miller; and Office of the Mayor, City of St.
Louis.

Richard Smreker, Senior Legislative Analyst

Missouri House of Representatives
Last Updated July 25, 2003 at 10:11 am