GCLA Email Updates > Missouri

Posted: 2/27/2004 9:38:42 AM EDT

Got these about half an hour ago:

From: Gene Dultz
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:03:28 -0600
Subject: GCLA LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: MOST FAQ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE -27 February 2004

FOR WIDEST POSSIBLE DISTRIBUTION.

MOST FAQ

Today's most frequently asked question is; when is car carry and carry on
out of state permit legal? Research on this critical question does not
provide as specific an answer as we would like.

The law is somewhat vague on the effective date of this Opinion. Due to a
Court Rule which says; Post Opinion Motions can be filed up to 15 days
after the Opinion is issued, the safer course is, not to carry in your car
or with an an out of state permit till that time has elapsed.

The Hancock issues in this Opinion are less than clear and are currently
being researched. Please be Patient.

Tim Oliver
LTC-LDF

Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance
P. O. Box 19739, Brentwood, MO 63144
Phone: 314-385-GUNS (4867) or 1-866-385-GUNS (4867)
Email Address: [email protected]
www.gclastl.org

From: Gene Dultz
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:25:00 -0600
Subject: GCLA LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: MOSC Issues Ruling on HB349
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE -26 February 2004

FOR WIDEST POSSIBLE DISTRIBUTION.

GCLA Legislative Update - MOSC Issues Ruling on HB349

The Missouri Supreme Court issued their ruling/opinion on the case filed against HB349.

They ruled on our side on the Article 1, Section 23 Issue.
They ruled on our side on the "mandate of the people" issue.
They ruled on our side on the "vagueness" issue.

The ruling has not been fully analyzed yet, but as expected from the questioning during the hearing on January 22, 2004, the MOSC focused on the funding provisions in the law, in particular the "Sheriffs Revolving Fund."

We are in the process of analyzing the ruling/opinion and will provide a full detailed impact analysis of the ruling when available.

Please remain patient while this part of the process occurs.

So far it doesn't look too bad.

Stay tuned to GCLA Legislative Updates for further information.

Greg Jeffery
Legislative Chairman,
Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance
www.gclastl.org

Legislative Coordinator,
Missourians for Personal Safety
www.moccw.org

Designated Part-time Spokesman,
Western Missouri Shooters Alliance
www.wmsa.net

Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance

P. O. Box 19739, Brentwood, MO 63144
Phone: 314-385-GUNS (4867) or 1-866-385-GUNS (4867)
Email Address:
[email protected]

www.gclastl.org

Posted: 2/27/2004 9:46:14 AM EDT

[#1]

From: Gene Dultz
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 11:41:05 -0600
Subject: GCLA LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: MOSC Decision Part 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE -26 February 2004 Part 2

DON'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU HEAR IN THE MEDIA!

I know that this will be a hard request to follow… but PLEASE refrain from kitchen-top analysis of the MOSC ruling. There is STILL a lot at stake here and we ARE NOT out of the woods yet.

PLEASE READ this Alert/Update in its Entirety.

At approximately 12:06 pm, the Missouri Supreme Court [MOSC] published its ruling/opinion on the case against HB349 et al filed by Brooks and company [plaintiffs].

When posting the early UPDATE announcing the MOSC publication, I cautioned everyone that the ruling and its impact are being ANALYZED. It IS being analyzed as you are reading this.

Let me convey to you what we know at this time:

1) Plaintiff's claim that HB349 et al [LTC Law] violates Article 1, Section 23 of the Missouri State Constitution and was unconstitutional was found deficient. The MOSC declared that the LTC Law WAS constitutional under Article 1, Section 23.

2) Plaintiff's claim that the LTC Law was "unconstitutionally vague" was DENIED by the MOSC.

3) Plaintiff's claim that the LTC Law "usurps the will of the people" was DENIED by the MOSC.

4) Plaintiff's $250,000 BOND money was remanded to Judge Ohmer's court for disposition.

5) Non-funded portions of HB349 MAY SOON stand in effect and the permanent injunction MAY SOON be lifted... STATEWIDE. We will prefer to keep a lid on parts of what this means for now [see below]. I know... once again I ask you to trust me.

6) The impact of the Hancock ruling is still being analyzed. As stated in my UPDATE a few days ago, possible corrections were already prepared and in place. Which mechanism we may choose to go with to "correct" any Hancock deficiencies will be determined by the analysis of the legal team... again... be patient and stay tuned.

WHERE WE ARE AT NOW.

Unfortunately, waiting... AGAIN. We are STILL analyzing this ruling.

While the temptation is great and is wholly understandable to kitchen-table analyze this ruling I URGENTLY CAUTION THAT THIS ACTIVITY STOP.

Let the legal team analyze it. That is what the LTC-Legal Defense Fund is for [see
www.learntocarry.com
and contribute today]. We NEED ACCURATE ANALYSIS.

If we float our own kitchen-table theories on what the ruling does or does NOT do... or WHEN they can do it... we could inadvertently get someone on this list following our table-top advice and unknowingly getting them in legal trouble.

PLEASE remember that a CRIMINAL defense case will cost you tens of thousands of dollars.

AGAIN... PATIENCE, PLEASE

For THIRTEEN LLOOONNNNGGG years we have waged this struggle. I know... I have been deep in the struggle for ALL THIRTEEN of them... continuous without stop. I can count the number of others who have done likewise and still have a few fingers remaining on my second hand. [You all know who you are an have MY deepest gratitude.]

So if we can be patient... please be patient too.

SHOULD WE CELEBRATE?

Well... yes... and no.

We CAN celebrate the ruling supporting us on Article 1, Section 23. That is a BIG victory!

We CAN celebrate the ruling supporting us on the "vagueness" issue.

We CAN celebrate the ruling supporting us on the "will of the people" contention.

We CANNOT yet celebrate the ruling on Hancock. The ruling may well have left some of the Hancock issues OPEN and that is what the legal team is ANALYZING. Again... we need to PLEASE remain patient and let them do their job.

WHAT ABOUT POINT 4 LISTED ABOVE... THE BOND?

Here is another reason we must ALWAYS BE POLITE.

The $250,000 bond will be debated for disposition in JUDGE OHMER's court. Please refrain from any detracting/disparaging remarks pointed toward the judge or his court. Believe me, you MAY feel better if you call someone names. BUT I BELIEVE YOU WOULD ALL FEEL BETTER IF WE GET THE COURT TO GIVE UP THE WHOLE $250,000 BOND THAT WAS POSTED BY ANTI-GUN-OWNERS.

The $250,000 could NOW be in serious jeopardy of being lost in PART or IN WHOLE. Lets do what we can to allow the Anti's to LOOSE IT ALL! We can do that by remaining patient and calm and refraining from emails/postings that could impugn the person who will be making the determination on how [AND HOW MUCH] of the $250,000 Bond will be dispositioned.

WHAT CAN I DO NOW?

BE PATIENT… still…..

The law is somewhat vague on WHEN this Opinion becomes effective.. Due to a rule which says that Post-Opinion-Motions can be filed up to fifteen days after the opinion is issued, the safer course is to NOT carry in your car or with an Out-Of-State permit UNTIL that time has elapsed AND until we get further guidance from the legal team on the impact of any post-opinion motions [if any].

We should NOT speculate on Car Carry or Out-Of-State permits [OOS permits]… PERIOD.

I know that this IS tough. But, again, please be patient, ALWAYS be POLITE, and hang in there… we WILL overcome.

Greg Jeffery
Legislative Chairman, Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance
www.gclastl.org

Legislative Coordinator, Missourians for Personal
Safety
www.moccw.org

Designated Part-time Spokesman, Western Missouri
Shooters Alliance
www.wmsa.net

Gateway Civil Liberties Alliance

P. O. Box 19739, Brentwood, MO 63144
Phone: 314-385-GUNS (4867) or 1-866-385-GUNS (4867)
Email Address:
[email protected]

www.gclastl.org

Let's wait on this stuff, so we don't have one of us wind up in the "pokey"

Posted: 2/27/2004 10:34:07 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
the safer course is to NOT carry in your car

Thanks for posting this kpel.

This makes me feel a little better about the info I got today when I called my county sheriff. I was told almost the exact same thing.

Warning

Confirm Action

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - GCLA Email Updates

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - GCLA Email Updates