Has anyone heard anything about Judge Ohmer and his ruling on CCW. He said he would try to render his written ruling by nNov 1st. We are pretty darn clase with no word on it. I thought sure it would be today and not on a Saturday. Does anyone have any recent info since the last hearing on the 23rd? Is there some reason for delaying like this? Does it play in with the Supreme courts schedule? Any input would be appreciated.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
(MO) Where's Ohmer ?
- Thread starter chrisinmo
- Start date
- Status
-
Not open for further replies.
I'm getting sick of this whole mess...
As many of you have read by now, the Mo. Constitution reads something like this...
"That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in the defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons. "
I'm finding it hard to believe that they are making that simple language so complicated.
The word "this" directly refers to the first part of the sentence.. It ties the first section to the second, simple enough.
The word "justify" refers to the first part of the sentence as well.
We can own them, but that Article by itself does not "justify" carrying them concealed.
Ok, so what does "justify" concealed carry? Our Legislators!!! And that is exactly what has happened when HB349 passed.
I certainly wish it read... "But this ALONE shall not justify..." Which is what I believe it is intending to state.
I figure the word "justify" all by itself leaves room for negotiation on the concealed aspect because it begs the question of what does justify carrying concealed.
As many of you have read by now, the Mo. Constitution reads something like this...
"That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in the defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons. "
I'm finding it hard to believe that they are making that simple language so complicated.
The word "this" directly refers to the first part of the sentence.. It ties the first section to the second, simple enough.
The word "justify" refers to the first part of the sentence as well.
We can own them, but that Article by itself does not "justify" carrying them concealed.
Ok, so what does "justify" concealed carry? Our Legislators!!! And that is exactly what has happened when HB349 passed.
I certainly wish it read... "But this ALONE shall not justify..." Which is what I believe it is intending to state.
I figure the word "justify" all by itself leaves room for negotiation on the concealed aspect because it begs the question of what does justify carrying concealed.
revlar
Member
Where's Ohmer? He's hiding - and working frantically to concoct the best CYA decision he can possibly put together.
He can try to delay (run and hide) - but he sure as the dickens can't do it forever.
The cost is mounting daily and a dear price will be paid.
He can try to delay (run and hide) - but he sure as the dickens can't do it forever.
The cost is mounting daily and a dear price will be paid.
- Status
-
Not open for further replies.