Disappointed in some MO residents and CCW

[Harold Mayo]

Although I now live in Arkansas after several years in Indiana, I was born and raised in southern Missouri and still consider myself a Missourian even if the guvment does not. I was thrilled when MO residents "won" the "right" to carry concealed.

An acquaintance of mine is quite a good firearms trainer and does it for a living (www.aptacademy.com) and he is giving some good classes from lesson plans that he and a former professor of defense studies (now an assistant SECDEF) drew up several years ago. I haven't been to his CCW classes but I am certain from other classes that I've had with him that he covers the legalities very well as well as instructing the students in shooting and trying to make sure that they are capable in 8 hours of time. He goes beyond the minimums required and that's a good thing. Just owning a gun and having a concealed carry permit does not a gunfighter make.

I've been disappointed with some of the attitudes of people that I know in Missouri, though. I shouldn't be, though, I guess because their attitude is really no different than that seen anywhere else. Most people want the permit because it enables them to carry a weapon in their vehicle without worrying about the legality of it. That's it. Most already did it, anyway, but now they just want to pay $100 or so to not worry when they get pulled over for speeding and they have a gun in the vehicle. Few care about the text of the law, where they can carry (since few plan to carry on their person), or the implications of shooting someone.

I just have to shake my head. My own father asked me if one of my friends who is a firearms instructor (not the one mentioned above) would just "sign off" on him so he could get the permit and not have to go through the class. A local guy is offering the course and has slyly hinted that his course probably won't be the full length as they can cover everything in much less time.

It's just sad. I guess that I love firearms and self-defense stuff far more than most, of course, but you'd think that people would be a little more responsible.

 

[sm]

Well sir I believe that attitude is not restricted to MO. As you pointed out many want the legal aspect of having in vehicle. In in AR also, when I assisted with some CCW, it was not uncommon for persons to inquire about legal definitions, or I'm so and so and went to school with him or her, can you sign off. Surprised at the number myself whom didn't want to actually carry, or train, just legal in vehicle.

The other surprise: well hell been carrying all this time w/o one, got more rights than a permit holder, none of the gummits business. And yes some were well trained, and had attended some known schools!

 

[Futo Inu]

That is too bad. When I did my CCW 9-hour course in 1996, I ate up everything in the classroom instruction part, and a few other people asked questions besides me, but I guess some people don't care. The second part, that of shooting 50 rounds at the 3-yard and 5-yard targets didn't do much for me, however - too easy.

 

[El Tejon]

Harold, isn't it true that when you lived in Indiana you met several individuals who got the little pink card to carry "only when I need it", like downtown Indy (like they are terrified of going for a salad or a latte with the vicious yuppie gangs that hang out there).

 

[Harold Mayo]

Yeah, but it seemed like more of the people that I knew in Indiana who had gone through the simple and relatively painless process of getting the permit were actually MORE interested in the details of carrying than people who I know in Missouri who are actually long-time gunowners and shooters.

Of course, that might also be the problem with my perception. In Indiana, I knew no one really well and the gun folks that I knew were the ones that hung around in guns stores (er, like me...), so I guess that they would logically be more inclined to want the knowledge. In Missouri, I know a huge cross-section of people since that's where I grew up. Maybe, in considering statistics, it's just my perception.

Don't know, though. It seems that a lot of folks in MO are pretty casual about getting the permit. I'd be interested to see, after a few years, what percentage of people in urban and rural areas get their permit in MO vs. other states.

Kirk, is Les still running his gun store or has he gotten out of it? I almost introduced myself to you in there one time when you were getting ammo for, I believe, a trip to TR but you were backed up to the front of the store and seemed to be in a hurry.

 

[El Tejon]

El Tejon in a hurry? Cell phone going off, giving orders, waving his hands, throwing money at people--what a shocker!

Les still has the place and is expanding his line. All kinds of tac clothing now. It's tacticalious.

Harold, I believe it is your perception. People pretty much the same everywhere.

 

[SW 586]

Most people want the permit because it enables them to carry a weapon in their vehicle without worrying about the legality of it. That's it. Most already did it, anyway, but now they just want to pay $100 or so to not worry when they get pulled over for speeding and they have a gun in the vehicle.

Harold, I believe I am correct in saying that the Missouri concealed carry law DOES NOT require one to have a permit to carry concealed in a vehicle.
The permit is only required to carry concealed upon your person.

 

[hillbilly]

I am preparing information packets to send out to several county sheriff's offices in SW Missouri to get on their list of "approved" firearms instructors.

Even though I am in Arkansas, I plan on teaching near Missouri, and even in Missouri if I can find classroom space and a range.

I won't wink-wink and nudge-nudge people through the class.

http://www.possumpistol.com

hillbilly

 

[Gandalf]

As of Oct. 11th you DO NOT need a permit to carry a loaded gun in your vehicle. REad it again HAROLD.

 

[outdoorman63]

in the car

true on the 11th we dont have to have anything to carry legally loaded concealed in the front part of our vehicle....but i did make a copy of the law and a copy of the article by the missouri sheriff's organization that was printed in the st louis paper and am also keeping these with my gun in my console.....

 

[SW 586]

outdoorman63,
I think that is a VERY good idea. Unfortunate, but you never know when you're going to have to "educate" an overzealous cop.

 

[Harold Mayo]

You don't need to after the 11th but prior to that, MO law doesn't allow the carry of a loaded firearm concealed within the vehicle. You miss the point.

 

[jsalcedo]

I think there are differences between people in different geographical regions.

For example, I remember my first job in an office complex. The bosses would bring in guns for show and tell during lunch and it wasn't unusual
to see a remington 700 or a O/U shotgun leaning against someones office wall.

Many of us had guns in our cars and at the time we didn't even think about it. I'm thinking now that the "no big deal" factor is why only 224,000 Texans have a CHL. The guns have always been there and ready if the need ever arose.

In a place like Kansas City (my hometown) The gun culture is there in the outskirts but an overall inner city culture has grown up without hunting or guns being an everyday part of life.

I suspect that CCW will be desirable for many folks. Buying a gun, getting the permit and carrying will be an attractive novelty for many wanting to excercise a new freedom.

It would not be surprising if the number of MO Concealed license holders surpasses many larger states.

 

[jdege]

When I teach, I tell my students it's their own business when or where they carry, but that carry is something that takes practice, and the more of it they do, the more practiced they'll get.

John Ross's web site includes a page of advice for newbies:

http://john-ross.net/newbies.htm

When you park your car, you probably turn the key to "off" and remove it, release your seatbelt, open the door, and hit the power lock button, all in about two seconds and without even thinking about what your hands are doing. This is because you have done it so often it has become instinctive. It is this level of habit that you must acquire with your firearm, and the only way it will happen is with frequent, sustained practice.

That's just as true of handling a pistol - holstering, unholstering, loading, clearing, figuring out what you're going to do with it in a public restroom - as it is of shooting.

You may think you can figure out when you're going to be at risk, and only carry then. For some types of risk, you might be right, for others, you will certainly not be.

But if you're going to carry only rarely, instead of making a regular practice of it, you're going to be far less safe while carrying.

 

[SW 586]

You don't need to after the 11th but prior to that, MO law doesn't allow the carry of a loaded firearm concealed within the vehicle. You miss the point.

Well then what IS your point Harold? I thought you WERE talking about the new law that goes into effect on Oct. 11.

 

[greyhound]

I live in MD so I have about as much experience with CCW as I do with going to the moon, but I can report that the GF's parents in central Alabama both have CCW permits signed off on by the local sheriff, and both leave their weapons 24/7 in the car only.

Her father has been shooting since a tot, both handguns and long arms, but mostly hunting so I'll bet neither has any real SD training. I figure its not my place to bring up real concealed carry, given that my own state does not allow it (may issue my Aunt's Cat's Pants).

 

[Groupguy]

Harold,

It's a fact that those who ride the coattails don't appreciate the right as much as those who worked to earn it. I can tell you that I'll appreciate the right and do my best to pass it on to my students. As you know, I recently passed the instructor class. An instructor's potential liability should dictate that he/she take the instruction very seriously and not cut corners.

Ryan

 

[Standing Wolf]

I took the course seriously. I filled out the forms honestly. I've made it my business to learn the law pertaining to concealed firearms in Colorado. I never leave home without a gun.

It's about our civil rights, not whims.

 

[Harold Mayo]

Totally correct, guys. I think that the primary component that is lacking in our society is just what got mentioned: RESPONSIBILITY.

Hey, Ryan...good to hear from you again.

 

[outdoorman63]

on the 11th

correct on the day of the 11th those items will go into my vehicle..gun and paperwork til i get my ccw

 

[jdege]

For all that we talk about the long history of the individual right to keep and bear arms, for most of that history, it was the individual duty to keep and bear arms.

 

[Edward429451]

All kinds of tac clothing now. It's tacticalious.

Ya mean tacticalicious? I'm with you there. Tactical clothing is great. I'm workin on my collection.

It always amazes me to how many people carry in the car but not on their person. I loathe leaving my gun in the car unattended. I'd rather risk taking it someplaces that I really shouldn't and know its safe, rather than risk a punk kid or criminal from getting it and getting into more trouble with it. Oppurtunity and all that. I only leave it in the vehicle when I feel its absolutely necessary.

 

[greyhound]

Looking at it from another angle: why do people only want a gun in the car? Is it because they somehow feel really unsafe only in their vehicle? Is fear of a car-jacking so much greater than being mugged/assaulted on the street?

Or is it the whole hassle of real carrying: the weight, need to be aware of your firearm, etc?

I'll bet the latter- doesn't require the constant diligence to have a firearm in the glovebox that it does carried on the person.

It would be interesting to see some stats about defensive uses of firearms kept in cars as opposed to on the person. I doubt they exist, but might make the "hassle" of on person carry seem a little less.

 

[DougCxx]

Totally correct, guys. I think that the primary component that is lacking in our society is just what got mentioned: RESPONSIBILITY.

- Yes, but who better could explain the consequences of not being responsible? A firearms instructor or a criminal lawyer?
For that matter, consider that:
There is no safety course for bathtubs.
There is no safety course for automobiles.
There is no safety course for tobacco.
There is no safety course for prescription medications.
There is no safety course for alcohol.
THere is no safety course for marriage (!) or parenthood (don't get me started on that one...).
-------------
There should be no safety course required, simple as that (-please inform me what part of the second amendment mentions a safety course?).
The reason is that allowing such a requirement opens the door to an "effective" ban later in time--such as, Sarah Brady becomes president and changes the requirements of the safety course to be taught by federally-licenesed carry instructors, to be 40hrs/week and six months long, involve firing hundreds of thousands of shots from dozens of different weapons. -Oh, and the course might cost the students tens of thousands of dollars to attend, but its's only for safety's sake, right? Who can argue with that?
..."Look, we want you to be able to carry, we just want you to be safe about it..........."
-
-of course, licensing "carry instructors" costs $500,000 for their program, , , , -and the class only allows 30 students per 12-month course, so it'll be a while before you can take a citizen-level course, , , ,
~

 

[Harold Mayo]

It isn't a safety course that I'm talking about...not at all. Safety should be a given when dealing with firearms. I totally agree with you on most of what you said.

What I am getting at is that people don't want to learn OTHER things, like HOW to use the firearm, HOW to carry concealed, WHAT to do if you end up using the firearm in self-defense, WHEN you are justified in using the firearm...

A criminal lawyer might NOT have an edge over a firearms instructor...just depends on their respective backgrounds. A firearms instructor who does a lot of expert witness testimony is probably going to have a better handle on things than a criminal lawyer who has never tried a case involving the use of force.

People want to get "permission" (that sticks in my craw) to carry a firearm but they don't have much of a clue about the how, what, and when that I mentioned above. There should really be no restriction whatsoever on carry and when you could or should use a firearm should be obvious but, in today's world, that just isn't the case.