Today's Post Dispatch headline read "Missouri's Concealed Carry Law: No one can say 'I told you so'".

Red the article here

The article claims that, fewer permits than expected were issued.  They overlooked a couple of key points, though.

The following is a letter I sent to the editor:
---------------------------------------------------------------------

I just finished reading the cover story today relating to the state's concealed carry law.  You noted that issuance of state permits has been much lower than anticipated.  You overlooked a couple of points.  Even though the law has been in effect for two years now, some of the more populated areas of the state, such as Jackson and St. Louis Counties only recently started issuing permits.

Another thing your article overlooked was that Missouri will honor any carry permit from any other state.  Many residents of Jackson and St. Louis Counties, frustrated by their inability to obtain a permit locally, applied for permits from other states.

I was dismayed when I heard that St. Louis County was using my tax dollars to actively fight the concealed carry law, both before and after it went into effect.  They did not want money for my application a year ago, so they are not getting it now!

I have held a concealed permit from another state since before I moved to Missouri.  I was legal to carry the second the law went into effect.  I see no reason to pay St. Louis County for a permit, when I already have one from a state that does not try to curtail my rights.  That same permit is honored by the entire state of Missouri, including those counties that would prefer to deny me those rights.

The reason the number of applicants is lower than expected is because of all the other frustrated residents like myself.  The true number of people licensed to carry is likely much higher than what was reported in your article.

I read the entire article off of the link that you provided and it was an interesting read.  Your response was appreciated as the facts you included were pretty significant and should not have been left out of the original article.  The article itself wasn't nearly as negative as I was anticipating but still annoying none-the-less due to the information that was left out.

I told a very good friend today that every time an editorial is written bashing guns by a major newspaper, it makes me want to respond by going out, purchasing five more firearms and finding a way to bring five youths into the sport of competition shooting/hunting/shooting in general and reporting my actions thus:

"Dear anti-gunner,

 Today, as a direct result of your article, I have purchased X more firearms and have enrolled X youths into competition shooting in hopes of fostering an early but deep life-long love of firearms in them.  Keep up the good work."

I read the article today - real big headline for story with so little bang or meaningful content.

Mokwa's comment about tracking thefts of firearms from vehicles is interesting - either he is negligent, the problem is so tiny that there is nothing to track, or he has an agenda to blow the problem out of proportion unemcumbered by actual data.

Quoted: Mokwa's comment about tracking thefts of firearms from vehicles is interesting - either he is negligent, the problem is so tiny that there is nothing to track, or he has an agenda to blow the problem out of proportion unemcumbered by actual data.

Mokwas a fucking hack. One gun getting stolen from a car back in 04 is enough justification for him that the law is bad.

When I first read the article my initial thought was Yes, we CAN say 'I told you so' because pro-gun groups said this is exactly what would happen. Crime wouldnt skyrocket, the streets wouldnt run red with blood, and we wouldnt have tons of angry motorists shooting each other over road rage. What has happened is EXACTLY what pro-gun groups said would happen. We said it wouldnt cause problems, so you might as well give people the freedom to carry, and we were right.

One of the other valid reasons I've heard for a lower than expected issuance of CCW permits is the fact that the law allows anyone over 21 to have a concealed firearm in their vehichle without having to get the permit.

Although I am now applying for my permit,  that was one of the big things that I wanted to be able to do.  Since I was able to do that without the permit , I was content to only take advantage of that portion of the law for a while, as have several other people that I know.

I just got an email from to Post Dispatch asking to publish my letter.  Maybe word will get out.

Quoted: One of the other valid reasons I've heard for a lower than expected issuance of CCW permits is the fact that the law allows anyone over 21 to have a concealed firearm in their vehichle without having to get the permit. Although I am now applying for my permit,  that was one of the big things that I wanted to be able to do.  Since I was able to do that without the permit , I was content to only take advantage of that portion of the law for a while, as have several other people that I know.

I'm going one step further and not even applying for a permit.

Why?

I can't carry where I work.  I'm pretty sure I can't even legally carry on part of my drive to work, much less leave it in the car in the parking lot.  When I travel its usually by plane.  Can't carry there either.  Around town errands typically take place at odd times and do not involve places where I expect trouble, but in those instances I can keep it in the car thanks to the provision that says you don't need a permit for that.

Why pay $$ for something I cannot use 22+ hours (8 at work, 8 sleeping, the rest communting to and from work or just being in or around the house) out of every day?

If the money went to something useful, then I would, since the benefit to me (having the permit for the little bit I'd make use of it + money going towards useful programs) would outweigh the cost.  But it goes to the sherrif, and if there's anything rural MO DOESN'T need its more money in the hands of billy-bob-sherrif so his boys can play around like they're a real swat team.  Spend the money on the conservation department or making MODOT fix potholes.  But don't piss it away so billy and the boys can play dress-up.

If the money went to something useful, then I would, since the benefit to me (having the permit for the little bit I'd make use of it + money going towards useful programs) would outweigh the cost. But it goes to the sherrif, and if there's anything rural MO DOESN'T need its more money in the hands of billy-bob-sherrif so his boys can play around like they're a real swat team. Spend the money on the conservation department or making MODOT fix potholes. But don't piss it away so billy and the boys can play dress-up.

I'm not sure this is really fair, MO is still the #1 state for meth production IIRC and those local billy bobs are the ones that have to go drive 15 minutes down a gravel road to kick in the door of a suspected meth lab. I lived in rolla for awhile and I've seen the phelps co guys just as you describe, but when you think about it, they need it.

Garret, I saw your letter in todays paper. Good job!

Quoted: Why pay $$ for something I cannot use 22+ hours (8 at work, 8 sleeping, the rest communting to and from work or just being in or around the house) out of every day?

Why did I spend the $$ when I usually don’t carry? Because I grew up in South Carolina and to get a CCW you had to be part of the governor's good old boy network. The law has since changed to allow CCW and machine guns. I thought I would never live long enough to have a permit. When Missouri changed the law to allow CCW, I took the class on the first Saturday after the law took effect. I had to wait over a year for Jackson County to start issuing permits. If you don’t exercise your rights they will be lost for everyone.

I also own guns, vote, and serve on jury duty! Do you?

Originally Posted By Brother Kane: I also own guns, vote, and serve on jury duty! Do you?

  Yep, Yep, yep

My employer does not allow them, so I lock mine up in the car and park on the street in front of the buildings camera.  I work in an area where people have been attacked and several were car-jacked just blocks away.  I sometimes work here late at night.  I refuse to come and go unarmed but I still abide by the company rules on their property.  Otherwise I carry whereever I go.  Most places I go have no signs forbiding it so I have no issues.  

I'm so used to it now that I don't even notice I have it.  I've fallen asleep on the couch with it on.  I don't receive any morning briefing about where I can expect to encounter a life threatning situation therefore I assume it could happen anywhere and I try to maxamize my ability to confront it and come out on top.

As to the article.... well, I'm another person who got tired of my county dicking around and not taking applications.  I simply purchased a Florida permit and forgot about the suits and screaming and threats and whines.  I just started packing as soon as my permit arrived and called it good.  

Of course we can say "I told you so".  Not one predicted outcome from the hysterics of the left came true.  Not one.  Of course there never was any doubt really, this has been done in numerous states and not one has been different.  Of course like liberals everywhere, when they win they win, and when they lose.... they win because you weren't right enough.  

Quoted: Garret, I saw your letter in todays paper. Good job!

Hey, cool!  I was hoping they'd wait until the weekend.  I was out of state all week and didn't get a chance to pick up the paper.

Can't find it online either.  Oh well, I already know what it says.