Voters, not lawmakers, should decide. News-Leader File Photo

So was that a mumble in 1999 when Missouri voters rejected a proposal to allow adults to carry concealed weapons? Legislators either didn't hear them or believed the vote should be ignored, because they've passed a bill to allow Missourians to pack heat under their coats or in a purse. They refused to let voters have a say.

Gov. Bob Holden wisely vetoed the bill.

It's a bad bill for a lot of reasons, but especially because it ignores the voters' expressed will. The 52-48 margin by which the concealed-weapons proposal failed in 1999 is greater than the margin by which voters rejected a tobacco tax last year.

Yet Republicans tell us the voters' word on the tax was so final, there's no point in putting the issue back on the ballot. But the gun vote was so indecisive, it's OK for legislators to pass a new law on their own? This is hypocrisy.

The hypocrisy is matched only by the poor judgment within the bill.

The bill lists a number of places where people could not carry concealed weapons, including police stations, polling places, jails, courthouses and schools — although it is OK to take one onto the parking lot of any of those places as long as you leave the gun in the car.

Bars are off limits, but not restaurants that serve alcohol. Concealed guns would not be allowed in stadiums of more than 5,000 seats, but they would be legal in places like the Springfield-Ozark Mountain Ducks stadium. The thinking must have been that the body count would be lower.

All of these restrictions are meaningless, though, because the bill specifically states that there will be no penalty for violating these prohibitions.

The offender could only be asked to leave; if he or she refused and a police officer were called, then and only then there may be a fine of $100. But the person wouldn't lose his or her permit to carry a concealed weapon. That would happen only after twice being escorted away by a police officer, and the suspension would be for only one year.

This is not a bill that puts public safety first. This is a bill that puts guns first. That is backward.

The bill makes the wrong decisions without giving voters a chance to say whether they've changed their opinion since 1999. Concealed-weapons supporters claim that the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, changed everything. People want to be able to protect themselves, they say, as though a handgun could somehow stop a jumbo jet from crashing into a skyscraper.

If the terrorist attacks changed everything, let people vote. The only reason not to allow a vote would be if the bill's supporters don't expect the result to change.

We don't believe it would. Concealed weapons are a bad idea, especially the way this bill is written. The veto should stand.

Copyright © 2003, The Springfield News-Leader, a Gannett company.