Missouri Removes Prohibition of Weapons on Public Transport for Permit Holders

Missouri Gun Control Allexxandar-iStock-884171048
Missouri Removes Prohibition of Weapons on Public Transport for Permit Holders, iStock-884171048

U.S.A.-(AmmoLand.com)- HB 52 in Missouri is written to remove some prohibitions existing in one of the gun free zones in Missouri. It allows people with concealed carry permits to carry their defensive firearms on public transportation. First, the current law.  From House Bill NO. 52, mo.gov:

Paragraph 3(11) of Section 70.441:

(11) Except as otherwise provided under section 571.107, no weapon or other instrument intended for use as a weapon may be carried in or on any facility or conveyance, except for law enforcement personnel. For the purposes hereof, a weapon shall include, but not be limited to, a firearm, switchblade knife, sword, or any instrument of any kind known as blackjack, billy club, club, sandbag, metal knuckles, leather bands studded with metal, wood impregnated with metal filings or razor blades; except that this subdivision shall not apply to a rifle or shotgun which is unloaded and carried in any enclosed case, box or other container which completely conceals the item from view and identification as a weapon;

The bill adds the below addition to 571.107, The addition exempts permit holders, while they are carrying a concealed firearm.

Theoretically, if HB 52 passes, permit holders could still be arrested for the concealed carry any of numerous other weapons, such as knives or clubs.

Here is the relevant new part of Section 571.107, exempting permit holders:

3. Not withstanding any provision of this chapter or chapter 70, 577, or 578 to the contrary, a person carrying a firearm concealed on or about his or her person who is lawfully in possession of a valid concealed carry permit or endorsement shall not be prohibited or impeded from accessing or using any publicly funded transportation system and shall not be harassed or detained for carrying a concealed firearm on the property, vehicles, or conveyances owned, contracted, or leased by such systems that are accessible to the public. For purposes of this subsection, “publicly funded transportation system” means the property, equipment, rights-of-way, or buildings, whether publicly or privately owned and operated, of an entity that receives public funds and holds itself out to the general public for the transportation of persons. This includes portions of a public transportation system provided through a contract with a private entity but excludes any corporation that provides inter city passenger train service on railroads throughout the United States or any private partnership in which the corporation engages.

Missouri passed Constitutional Carry in 2016, overriding Governor Nixon’s veto in that year.

No permit is required to carry concealed weapons in most of Missouri.  Why limit the carry of weapons on public transportation to hidden, unloaded rifles and shotguns for anyone; and hidden pistols for people with concealed carry permits?

The sensible thing would be to prohibit the carry on public transportation to legal weapons by people who may legally carry weapons.

Perhaps this incremental reform is the best which can be moved through the Missouri legislature at this time.

Improvements that seem plausible would be:

Replace “concealed firearm” with “legal weapon

It makes no sense to allow concealed unloaded rifles and shotguns, and/or loaded handguns, and forbid all other legal weapons.

Alternately, replace:

“carrying a firearm concealed on or about his or her person who is lawfully in possession of a valid concealed carry permit or endorsement”


“carrying a legal weapon on or about his or her person who is lawfully in possession of the weapon.”

It makes no sense to trust people to carry all through the state and forbid their carry on public transportation.

It seems the law is designed to disarm poor people.

HB 52 is an incremental improvement. It is better than nothing.

Perhaps the legislature will see fit to improve HB 52 with appropriate amendments.

About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Dean Weingarten

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

So, I must have a permit, to exercise my right to keep and bear arms on public transportation, funded with my tax dollars through a government entity that is absolutely supposed to uphold the letter and spirit of our 2nd Amendment? I’m left a little flat…..

Ryben Flynn

Why do some comments need “Awaiting For Approval”?

Ryben Flynn

Something else I noticed, I could not edit a comment after about 1 or 2 minutes. I tried to edit the comment above and got the red banner popup “This comment can no longer be edited.”
Is it because I was going through a VPN rather than my ISP?
I could understand if there was something offensive or a banned word (are there?), but all I did was to explain nullification to John down below.
And why aren’t .jpg images allowed? I have to keep changing them to a .png.

Ryben Flynn

There it goes again. My reply to you got flagged for approval.

Autsin Miller III

SAPA legislation has also passed the house and is going to the state senate for a vote soon too. Hopefully it will give those of us who live in Missouri some protection against the rabid lefties running loose in DC.

Autsin Miller III

Yep it was. Sorry if I hurt your feeling PS.


Maybe I am missing something here – the way I read SAPA, it does NOT nullify federal law as we are being told. If you violate NFA, you will be prosecuted in a federal court – so someone please tell me how SAPA nullifies that prosecution?

Ryben Flynn

Nullification means the State will NOT assist the Federal Government in enforcement of a Federal Law by using personnel or funds, it would be up to Federal Law Enforcemnet (FBI, Homeland Security, US Marshall Service, Etc.) to enforce those Laws.
Like California protects Illegal Aliens and other States allow marijuana.

Autsin Miller III

It’s sure not a perfect solution John but as Mr Flynn answered, it makes it more difficult for the feds to push their regulations down our throats, at least there won’t be as many people available to enforce them. State level is about the only chance we have outside of the SCOTUS and that seems precarious. I certainly get your concerns though.


In the polite, civilized, and protected world that we live in, “State level” and “SCOTUS” are often held as our only solutions. After those fail, and they already have to a significant degree, we armed people must take up the slack. Let us not forget who we are.

Autsin Miller III

Indeed. Balkanazation seems to be right around the corner.

uncle dudley

Every step to advance gun rights is a good step, not everyone will agree with that statement.
Currently there are security people not allowed to carry a firearm on the mass transit train system in the St. Louis metro area, only police officers can have a firearm while on this system.