Friday
According to FEE Missouri has joined the free states:
Concealed-Handgun Law Passes in Missouri (9/12/03)Lawmakers today granted most Missourians the right to carry concealed guns, overriding a veto by Gov. Bob Holden (D) and reversing the outcome of a statewide election on the issue four years ago. Missouri becomes the 45th state to allow concealed guns, although nine sharply restrict permits, according to the National Rifle Association. (Washington Post, Friday)
I understand Michigan is also very close to falling in line.
Correction: It's Wisconsin, not Michigan

I believe Michigan has already joined the ranks of the free states. You may be thinking of Wisconsin, where a concealed carry law should be passed out of the legislature very soon now. Unfortunately, the governor has promised a veto, and it doesn't look like there are enough votes to override the veto.
Bummer - I was looking forward to buying a new gun. My current handgun Para Ordnance P-14 .45)
is way too bulky for comfortable concealed carry.
Posted by R.C. Dean at September 12, 2003 11:39 PM
As someone who occasionally feels a burning cynisim that there is a constant decline in Constituitional integrity, this trend is really good to see. It makes me feel a larger sense of optimism than I otherwise might.
Posted by Russ Goble at September 13, 2003 02:43 AM
Your humble Jeffersonian, a resident of a St. Louis suburb, will be getting his permit shortly. Kudos to the legislators who braved the media firestorm and did the right thing.
Posted by Jeffersonian at September 13, 2003 04:05 AM
So when were unconcealed guns eg as worn by cowboys banned? Or are they still legal? If not, why is it only concealed guns that are allowed? And how are you expected to get your gun from the shop to your home in a state without a concealed weapons law?
Posted by Patrick Crozier at September 13, 2003 09:25 AM
Patrick - every state allows you to transport a properly cased firearm in your car, etc. "Cased" is not regarded as "concealed." Go figure.
Here in Wisconsin we have a ban on concealed carry but not open carry. However, if you go out in public with a six-shooter on your hip you are likely to get arrested for disturbing the peace. "Protect and serve," eh?
Posted by R C Dean at September 13, 2003 12:21 PM
The difference between a cased and unloaded firearm (i.e. not available for immediate use) and a loaded one concealed on your person (i.e. ready to go) is a fairly obvious one...
Concealed carry appears to be about the only way of actually reducing criminal use of guns. This is counter-intuitive to leftists who don't seem to be able to tell the difference between a law-abiding citizen and a criminal..............
Posted by mike at September 13, 2003 06:09 PM
R.C.Dean, since you offer mesome friendly advice to get out there and torch those Gatsos, let me counter by saying get rid of the fat-gripped Para-Ordnance (nice gun, but those double stack mags...) and stick to a Sam Colt original for carry. Believe me, if we peasants were still permitted handguns here, and if (big "if") they were legal for self defence, there's nothing I'd rather carry than my Series 70 Mk 4, bigger than the Commander I once had but I used to shoot it better. Especially with my load of WW brass, 7gr of Unique, and the Nosler 230gr truncated-cone hardball round... Ah, memories.
Posted by Tony H at September 13, 2003 07:10 PM
Dean, if you can stand using something other than the superior .45 round, might I suggest you evaluate the Heckler and Koch P7? It is pricey to say the least, but is slim, easily concealable, and very reliable. It also has what is considered by many to be the best factory trigger of any pistol anywhere, and it’s unique cocking system makes for a very safe carry piece. And it’s a really slick bit of machinery, eating any variety of +P hollowpoint fed to it.
Patrick: I find it ironic that in Texas (land of the Cowboys), open carry is forbidden. In the great free state of Arizona, unlicensed open carry is perfectly lawful, as is licensed concealed carry.
But licensing provides the applicant with another problem: the licensee must agree that the state should be able to ‘grant’ this ‘privilege’. Apparently this can establish legal precedent which can be used against the applicant in other contexts. For this reason, I have not yet applied for a concealed carry permit, and instead prefer to carry openly.
Posted by DouglasInAZ at September 13, 2003 08:34 PM
For those wanting to keep up with the latest in "Right to Carry" news: Packing.org.
Posted by Russell Whitaker at September 15, 2003 02:19 AM
"...leftists who don't seem to be able to tell the difference between a law-abiding citizen and a criminal"
mmmm... & of course we all know there's a hard & fast line from birth onwards. You won't find no previously law abiding citizens suddenly committing crimes, will you? nono, 'course not.
The statistics seem to show it's whether you like to trade your burglary, rape etc. statistics off against your murder statistics. Oh, & that issue of personal freedom/responsability of course; that's the strongest one in my book.
Posted by A_t at September 15, 2003 02:19 PM
"get rid of the fat-gripped Para-Ordnance (nice gun, but those double stack mags...)"
Cold, dead fingers, etc.
Its not the thickness of the grip that interferes with concealed carry so much as the overall bulk of the 1911-style pistol, IMO. I rather like the fat grip on the Para, and prefer it to the regular single-stack grips.
I am still debating what caliber to go with in a concealed carry gun. The manly .45 has much to recommend it, plus I already have two guns in that caliber, but many good carry guns (the Kahr, for example) don't come in this caliber. The 9mm is probably OK, but frankly this caliber wears lace on its panties, in my opinion, and I would prefer to stay away from it. The .40 is of course a compromise, but I feel a certain mulish resistance to "caliber creep." Hmm, decisions, decisions.
Posted by R.C. Dean at September 15, 2003 08:54 PM
AT - I haven't seen anything that indicates that murder rates have gone up after concealed carry comes to town. Please give us a link if you've got it. Thanks.
Posted by R.C. Dean at September 15, 2003 08:55 PM
In, fact Mr. Dean (forgive my omission of the honorific in an earlier post), 'A_t' will not be able to cite such data- because it doesn't exist. The data shows precisely the opposite case, as described in John Lotts' work on the subject: Dr. John Lotts' Website.
Posted by DouglasInAZ at September 15, 2003 09:44 PM









