to contact sacmo send email to
phone
636-230-2399
SACMO
PO Box 52
O'Fallon, MO
63366
SACMO GETS $20 FOR EVERY APPROVED APPLICATION FOR A LIMITED TIME. APPLY TODAY.
SECOND
AMENDMENT
COALITION
OF MISSOURI
THE HISTORY OF MISSOURI'S
PERMIT TO ACQUIRE
To All Members of the Missouri General Assembly: July 15, 2005
During the 2005 legislative session, HB-911 was introduced by Rep. Brian Munzlinger, which, in part, called for the complete repeal of the Permit-To-Acquire (PTA) a handgun system created under 571.080 and 571.090 RSMo. A hearing was held and testimony taken on May 2nd for HB-911. The amount of confusion and misunderstanding about this circa-1919 law exhibited by the Representatives present was disturbing, but understandable. It took 30 minutes before everyone understood that this was not just a purchase permit law, did effect concealed carry but was not a concealed carry permit and was so broadly written that it required a permit for every conceivable way of transferring a handgun to someone, no matter how short the time frame.
This post civil war, “Jim Crow” law, originally created to keep guns out of the hands of the “newly freed men” according to researchers, was not widely enforced until the late 60’s and is now applied differently in almost every one of Missouri’s 114 counties and the City of St. Louis. HB-911 expired at the end of the session, but it served the purpose of getting a discussion started. Repeal of this long abused, often misused and now redundant system is long overdue. But the question most often heard from friendly legislators is, “What’s this all about and why now?”
There are quite a number of serious problems with the PTA system. I will point out some of them in this letter but, because of the complexity of the subject, I would like to take the liberty of following up this letter with several subsequent letters, with details on this subject, over the next several months in order to avoid overwhelming or boring anyone.
One of the most obvious problems with the PTA system is that of very wide variations of interpretation and enforcement. A simple check of the web sites maintained by each county sheriff reveals the staggering differences. But it is coming to light in reports from around the state that some sheriffs and police chiefs are using this antiquated law to offset the General Assembly’s liberalization of the availability of self-defense with its passage of License to Carry/Car Carry (571.094) by the outrageous misuse of PTA. It is currently on some county web sites (Franklin, for example) that you must have a PTA to “prove” legal ownership or the gun will be seized. In other cases, police chiefs have publicly stated that, “the citizen’s gun will be seized by the officer until ownership can be proven” (Hazelwood). St. Louis City has a long history of seizing firearms under almost any circumstance. PTA is being used against and primarily affects honest Missourians. Using the PTA to prove ownership sounds very much like an eastern European “Show me your papers” statement by their state police. Nowhere in the PTA statute is there anything that hints that ownership is proven by the possession of a permit and the lack of any provision that one must carry a copy of their permit is being ignored. The PTA system is widely and dangerously misunderstood. Furthermore, according to the published study by the CDC in Atlanta, gun laws like the PTA cannot be statistically shown to reduce neither crime nor violence.
I would ask that you please visit some of these sheriff’s web sites and see for yourself the disparity involving PTA. Additionally, please read 571.080 and 571.090 and learn for yourself that this system is not just a “permit to purchase” system to keep handguns out of the hands of felons (which it does not do). It is a system that makes it a crime to hand your gun to your family member or friend so that they can “take a shot.” It tramples on private ownership of property and disparate enforcement statewide is in conflict with the equal protection/equal opportunity clause of our Constitution, Article 1, Section 2.
There are a number of compelling reasons why it is time to repeal the Permit to Acquire system. It is my hope that you will indulge me by considering my future letters as I enumerate more of those reasons. It is almost certain that this subject will be before you again in the 2006 legislative session and it is my hope that you will have a better understanding of the subject because of these communications.
Most Sincerely Yours,
Dale
A. Schmid, President,
The
Second Amendment Coalition of Missouri, Inc.
517
Connie Lane
Manchester,
Mo. 63021
previous
letters
12/4/04 5/21/04 3/18/04 3/15/04 2/2/04
12/22/03 09/29/03 09/12/03 08/14/03 08/06/03
06/11/03 05/05/03 05/02/03 4/28/03 4/20/03
4/11/03 4/9/03 4/4/03 3/17/03 3/5/03 2/21/03
`