forum042711_Project choices

Tough question!! I think all of these are important and should be fixed ASAP. Before giving my choices I would like to see another one added to the list. Employers!!!! Their company "RULES" should not carry more weight then "Missouri State Law" , at least not for CCW permit holders. While in their building...maybe..on their premises...maybe..but not once I clock out and leave the property...Mo. law allows this..now to the question..my order of choice is...

C) Criminals need to know that they will be held 1000% accountable for their actions and we as Missourians will not stand for their violent and criminal nature and actions. This should also include, not allowing friends, family ect. from suing as well. The only exception is the part about law enforcement. I have a brother who is a retired police officer and a nephew who is a county deputy. I have nothing but respect for these folks that put their life on the line everyday. (For those LEO's that will read this please be assured of my last statement and please don't be offended by this!!!!!), but it seems that the only time cops are held accountable is if there is a citizens video camera that captures the incident. It seems that they already have unwritten leniency and exceptions from prosecutors and the courts because they are cops. It could lead to more unnecessary brutality.

While I would love to see the Hancock repaired expeditiously, the matter of
Frivolous Law Suits is more urgent in my view. The very fact that someone
is in the act of committing a felony and gets shot for his effort should
deny him any legal recourse against the person whose life/property is being
attacked!. He should have gone fishing instead of committing a felony

FIX HANCOCK ISSUES OR ALLOW APPLICATION ANYWHERE, NOT JUST IN COUNTY OF RESIDENCE
THANKS
Best regards,
Dennis St.Clair

I think that option "C" would be best. It seems as it would be
least likely to being hijacked by the antis to eat away at LTC..

I live in St.L CO. I want hancock fix first. I have PA permit with FL on the way.

All three are very important equally:
A) Do away with the PTA system.
This should be done away with for CCW holders state wide.
B) Hancock fix to that Jackson & St. Louis residents can...
This would also open up reciprocity with other states that do not
fully recognize Mo. CCW holders. i.e.. Ark.
C) Frivolous lawsuit...
This is a must for all law-abiding manufacturers, no matter what
product that is legally manufactured.
All of these are equally important and should be addressed and prefiled before the General Assembly convenes in Jan. 05.

I pick C. Frivilouis Lawsuit Protection.
It would be nice to not have to apply every time for a permit to buy. St
Louis residents can get a Fla. permit. But if you protect yourself you could
be sued out of existence. That's scares me. Thanks

My first choice would be "C". I would like to see lawsuits that
are
deemed frivolous in all areas of our culture, not just firearms related
cases, effectively stifled. Suits so deemed should carry mandatory
compensatory orders that require the plaintiff to absorb all court and
attorney costs for both the plaintiff and the defendant. Lost wages and
incidental expenses due to defense of the suit should also be compensated
to the defendant.

My second choice would be to eliminate the redundant and purposeless PTA
system for concealable firearm transfers in Missouri.

I am not anxious to spend legislative effort and funds to accomplish
"B".
Not being a resident of either affected area weighs heavily on that
position. But the fact that drafters of the legislation managed to
accommodate the wishes of the Sheriff's Association regarding expenditure
of fees, and, simultaneously allow citizens of the areas receiving the
Supreme Court's discrimination to be licensed by other states speaks
volumes for the wisdom and foresight of those who wrote this legislation.
Until the mini-monarchies of the CLEO's in St. Louis and Jackson County
fall to public outcry, those citizens have the equivalent privileges
granted them as do we outside those areas. Being unable to fund the
county government with CCW fees should not, and does not, deter them from
being able to defend themselves as effectively as the rest of us. It
simply demonstrates the "head in the sand" mentality of the
mini-monarchies. Not a problem. Leave it the way it is. Let St. Louis
and Jackson County's fees go to support states that understand the our
need and desire for personal liberty.

Dick Hime
Raymore Outdoor Sports

C is very critical. A and B will come in good time, but let the dust
settle
and show everyone that blood is NOT going to be running in the streets with
the concealed carry laws in place. St. Louis City and County will
undoubtedly end up looking as ludicrous, liberal and on "The Far
Side", as
they indeed are.
Best regards
Otter

Fix the Hancock issue with Jackson and St. Louis Counties or force the
sheriffs to accept applications and issue permits as the state
legislators have provided.

Given my druthers

B. Because I live In Jackusaround County.
C. I might need it.
A. And maybe make the LTC a Brady/NICS card, while we're at it.

G. L Heaton

I say C....lawsuits against law abiding citizens that protect themselves from criminals....

Duh! All three, Dude!<g>

But if I would have to prioritize then permit to aquire would go to the bottom.
(It shouldn't disappear entirely though)

Next would be law suit protection.

But the most important item would have to be fixing the Hancock problem. I've
heard the argument that if we try to change the LTC law then everything goes on
the table. Great! We have a majority and a pro-rights governor. Put it all on the
table. This may even be the time to repeal the whole thing as they did in
Alaska. I could make a list of all the goofy parts of that law starting with the
23 year thing. At least fix the obviously broken parts.

If you don't, someone will die. Keep that in mind.

Steve U

"Which would you most like to see accomplished in the next year?"
A) Do away with the PTA system
Number 2 and could be combined with number 1.
B) Hancock fix so that Jackson & St. Louis residents can get a MO. license.
Number 1 priority, so Jackson County will start issuing permits.
C) Frivolous lawsuit protection, in case you should damage a burglar while they are trying to steal you blind, or if you should harm someone as they attempt to attack you, or if you are law enforcement attempting to do your job.
Number 3. We need to be real careful on the wording here.

Why can't we fix both the right to carry and the frivolous law suit
issues
this coming year. my preference is fix the CCW first, should be fairly easy.
Then fix the law suite issue.

Jim M.

I am a MSSA member, but not a WMSA member. However, I always scan your website when online.

Here are my poll preferences:

1. C - lawsuit protection or at least amend the so called "make my
day" law
in MO so a person could more effectively defend their home without fear of
prosecution.
2. A - The PTA system is basically handgun registration. If not done away
with altogether, at least suspend it for persons with a valid LTC. This goes
for NICS as well. We have already submitted to the background check, etc.
3. B - Fixing Hancock must be low on the priority list. This doesn't stop
anyone that wants a permit from getting one. It is just a ego struggle at
this point and the counties that aren't issuing have lost. They just don't
know it yet.

However, I would rather leave the LTC law alone than have anything added
that would restrict it. It is pretty good just the way it is.

You have a very good web site. I always enjoy the visit.

Stan A

#1

I am fortunate not to reside in Jackson yet, have friends whom do.
I think it's a crime to have worked so hard to get the CCW Passed
and they cannot benefit from it.

#2

What good does it serve to be able to protect yourself to end up being
in a court of law trying to protect yourself as a victim and seeing the
perpetrator
appears to have the law on their side.

#3

Do a way with the PTA system...

B- fix Hancock so we can get a MO license. It aggravates the hell out of me that I am considered a better citizen of Texas than I am of Missouri, where I live and pay taxes

C) Frivolous lawsuit protection, in case you should damage a burglar while they are trying to steal you blind, or if you should harm someone as they attempt to attack you, or if you are law enforcement attempting to do your job.

c) Frivolous lawsuit protection, in case you should damage a burglar while they are trying to steal you blind, or if you should harm someone as they attempt to attack you, or if you are law enforcement attempting to do your job.

A Hancock fix which also does away with the permit to transfer system, with a link to the new lawsuit protection bill.

Answer to poll, do away with the PTA!

If the PTA law were to be passed today, it would not pass a Hancock
challenge!

Don

My choice is, D: All of the above. Also include in
there the repeal of the statute that prevents our
ownership of suppresors. Of course the same statute
says Missourians can't own fully automatic weapons,
but I know that people in MO do. How does that work.
If you can tell me please respond, I emailed John Ross
about it but he is a busy guy.

I would really like to see all three happen. First fix the Hancock problem first. Then get rid of the stupid "daddy can i buy a pistol" PTA. I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6!

All three are of great importance to me, but considering my “great love” (NOT) for firearms registration I favor doing away with the PTA.

My answer" C

However, I think that the choice was worded poorly as most think about
"frivolous lawsuits" in conjunction to the lawsuits mounted against
the
firearm manufacturer when the product they produced has been illegally
obtained and used in a crime.

Currently before the Florida legislature is a return to the "castle
doctrine" where a homeowner should not be required to "flee" from
an
intruder in his/her own home before defending him/herself. In Missouri we
should also strive to regain our rights to self defense within our own
homes.

That said, I believe it is dangerous to push any LTC legislation at the
present time as it will no doubt include "shirt tail" compromises
tagged on
to it by the antis to dilute the rights we enjoy with the present LTC law.