Defensive Carry banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Please read the following letter I have drafted and am sending to my state legislators, the Governor, and the Attorney General (I'll edit slightly for the latter two). It will tell you everything you need to know. This is CRITICAL!!! I'm also contacting the NRA to drum up awareness and support.

Please feel free to cut and paste, or write your own version and send it to the appropriate people
---------------------------------------------------------------

Honorable Mr. _________,

On 17 January, 2009, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled in the case of Missouri vs. John L. Richard, that RSMo 571.030.1(5) is not unconstitutional thus opening up the potential for serious infringement on the liberties of literally hundreds of thousands of Missouri firearms owners.

RSMO 571.030.1(5) states that “A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly possesses or discharges a firearm or projectile weapon while intoxicated.”

Under RSMO 571.030.7, Unlawful use of weapons is a class D felony.

By this wording, any person in Missouri who has a firearm in their home and becomes intoxicated, whether by alcohol or prescription drugs, could be charged and convicted as a felon.

It is understood that alcohol and firearms do not mix well and present the potential for a fair amount of damage to public safety. However, within a person’s own home and under reasonable circumstances, the possibility of public endangerment is mitigated and must be overruled by our utmost commitment to preserve the right of security and privacy in our persons and possessions.

Consider that a person in their home, who otherwise is in legal possession of a firearm, and becomes otherwise legally intoxicated, could be the victim of home invasion, burglary or arson. Essentially, due to the overly broad interpretation of the statute as currently written, a person in their own home, having a few drinks, gives up their right to protect their own person, and their family by use of a firearm.

Of even more concern is that under the current statute, any person in Missouri who owns a firearm, who becomes intoxicated in their own home becomes a felon. This is patently absurd!

Numerous other states have recognized this potentiality and have constructed less vaguely worded statutes that both provide for the public safety, and yet preserve the rights of privacy and personal security.

Please consider drafting and/or sponsoring legislation to the aforementioned effect of preserving the civil rights of your constituency. An example may be an exception such as:

“Except that RSMO 571.030.1(5) shall not apply to persons in their own domicile, or other private property where they are legally allowed to be, provided the person may otherwise legally possess a firearm; or when a person displays or discharges a firearm in a manner justifiable by RSMO 563 in defense of self or others, and that such possession or discharge is not in violation of any other section of Chapters 571 and 563.”

Respectfully Submitted,

Name
NRA Certified Instructor
xxxx xxxxx Ave
xxxxxx, MO
(xxx)-xxx-xxxx

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
(FYI, RSMO 563 is the chapter of Missouri law which covers justifiable use of force.)

Missouri residents and NRA members, let's make this happen!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,178 Posts
Wow that is scary. The number of law abiding folks that would have been over .08 and had a firearm in the house will be very high.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
653 Posts
While I understand the intent of this legislation (responsible use of a firearm) the fact that you have had a few drinks doesn't negate your right of self-defense. If you do something irresponsible with a firearm, intoxicated or not, you should be held responsibility. But if the use of your firearm was responsible the fact that you were drunk shouldn't have a bearing on whether you are charged with a crime.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
799 Posts
Wow that is scary. The number of law abiding folks that would have been over .08 and had a firearm in the house will be very high.
Keep in mind that 571.030 does not set a legal definition for "intoxicated" like that for DUI - .08% BAC.

Joe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,864 Posts
What are these retards gonna come up with next,,,

If you are legally intoxicated you cannot give your baby a bath
If you are le "" """ "" use a power lawn mower to cut your grass
If you "" """ """ " Blah Blah Blahhhhh

Whats the world coming to for crying out loud

See below

"If you put the government in charge of the desert, there would be a sand shortage within ten years." - A very wise man
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top