Missouri Firearms Law

Missouri Firearms Law

General Overview

  • Liabilities with a Firearm:
    • Missouri holds its citizens to a duty of the highest degree of care while using firearms.
    • Insurance policies cover those liable for negligent shootings where somebody is injured, but will not cover those who intend to shoot another.
  • Conceal and Carry/Open Carry:
    • Missouri allows its citizens to conceal and carry a firearm if they have a valid conceal and carry permit, a conceal and carry endorsement issued prior to August 28, 2013, or has a conceal and carry permit or endorsement issued by another state or political subdivision.
    • Missouri does not prohibit open carrying a firearm, but allows local political subdivisions to enact ordnances that do prohibit open carrying to those without a conceal and carry permit or endorsement.
  • Self-Defense with a Firearm:
    • The use of deadly force in self-defense is justified when there is an unlawful and imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm to you, a third party, or your unborn baby.
    • Missouri has a “castle doctrine” where those acting in self-defense inside their home, vehicle, or private property do not have a duty to retreat.
    • Missouri offers an absolute legal defense against all criminal and civil remedies if self –defense is proven justified, granting attorney fees, court costs, and reasonable expenses.
  • Change Coming to Missouri
    • Missouri Senate Bill 656 rids away the duty to retreat when in public, extends the castle doctrine to invited guests, and establishes Constitutional conceal and carry.
    • University of Missouri, School of Law Professor Royce de R. Barondes is currently suing the University of Missouri to enable conceal and carrying on campus
  • Airplane Travel with a Firearm
    • When traveling by airplane in the United States, the Transportation Security Administration only requires that the firearm be unloaded in a locked, hard-sided case and declared before checking your bags.

Legal Memorandum: Missouri Firearms Law

Topic Questions

1. Under Missouri Law, what are the civil liabilities involved when discharging a firearm, and when can one be found liable if sued?

2. Under Missouri Law, when does a person have the right to use deadly force?

3. Under Missouri Law, does a person have the ability to conceal and carry and open carry a firearm and what are the guidelines involved?

4. Under Federal Law, what are the rules and requirements when flying in the United States with a firearm and ammunition?

Brief Answers

1. There are two types of civil wrongs involved with the shooting and handling of a firearm were a person can be sued and held liable; intentional tort and negligent tort. Intentional torts involve batteries and assaults where one intentionally injures another with a firearm or tries to injure another. A negligent tort means the person failed to exercise the highest degree of care when handling a firearm and resulted in the injury of another. An important note with intentional torts is that an insurance policy will not cover you if you receive a court award against you, while for negligent torts an insurance policy will cover you.

2. There are several situations in which Missouri authorizes the use of deadly force, including when there is an unlawful threat of imminent serious bodily or lethal harm; a person is illegally entering or inside a dwelling or private property and poses an imminent unlawful threat or use of force; when authorized to do so by law enforcement; and when a driver or pilot is trying to maintain control and safety on their vehicle when a lethal threat is made against them. There is, however, a duty to retreat when the actor is not within his castle (home, vehicle, or private property).

3. Missouri Law allows the conceal and carrying of firearms when the individual has valid conceal and carry permit, a conceal and carry endorsement issued prior to August 28, 2013, or has a conceal and carry permit or endorsement issued by another state or political subdivision. Missouri also allows the open carrying of a firearm, but allows political subdivisions to prohibit it for those without a valid conceal and carry permit or endorsement.

4. Federal law requires the firearm to be unloaded, in a hard-sided and locked container, and is declared before checked with the luggage. Ammunition must be checked as well and stored in containers designed to carry ammunition. Airlines also have limitations to the amount of ammunition that can be brought on the flight.

Discussion

The State of Missouri is a very pro-gun state, offering its residents the right to bear arms by incorporating the United States’ Second Amendment in Missouri Constitution Article I, Section 23, which reads:

That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms, ammunition, and accessories typical to the normal function of such arms, in defense of his home, person, family and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned. The rights guaranteed by this section shall be unalienable. Any restriction on these rights shall be subject to strict scrutiny and the state of Missouri shall be obligated to uphold these rights and shall under no circumstances decline to protect against their infringement. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the general assembly from enacting general laws which limit the rights of convicted violent felons or those adjudicated by a court to be a danger to self or others as result of a mental disorder or mental infirmity.

Mo. Const. Art. I, § 23 (LexisNexis, 2016). While this says Missouri citizens can own firearms and firearm related equipment and that the legislature cannot change this in just about any fashion, it does not mention anything about liabilities involved with shooting a firearm, the right or ability to conceal and carry, open carry, and if and when somebody can use deadly force.

In Missouri, a citizen can obtain the privilege of concealing and carrying a firearm if they meet the statutory requirements. A person in Missouri can also use deadly force in certain self-defense situations. However, Missouri does hold its citizens civilly liable for the intentional and unintentional wrongful shooting of a firearm. Finally, Federal law governs the ability to travel with a firearm on an airplane from state to state.

1. Under Missouri Law, what are the civil liabilities involved when discharging a firearm, and when can one be found liable if sued?

Handling a firearm requires the up most responsibility, and discharging it negligently or intentionally against a person, or even just using it to scare another can have legal consequences. There are three categories of liability in regards to a wrongful discharge of a firearm against another or brandishing a firearm intending to scare that a person can be successfully sued for: battery, assault, and negligence. Battery and assault land in the realm of intentional torts, while negligence is a different realm in and of itself. When it comes down to liability for intentional torts, an insurance policy will not cover you in a lawsuit, i.e. you are on your own to repay for the damage you caused. In a negligence case, your insurance policy does cover you. See Penn-Star Ins. Co. v. Griffey, 306 S.W.3d 591 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). Further, in spite of the potential liabilities for discharging a firearm, there is an absolute defense to all civil remedies available if the shooting is determined to be in self-defense.

A) Battery with a Firearm

A battery is (1) an intentional act with (2) the purpose or knowledge with substantial certainty that the act will (3) cause a harmful or offensive contact, or imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact, and (4) a harmful or offensive contact occurs. Restatement 2d of Torts, § 13 (LexisNexis, 2016). A battery can occur by punching somebody at the bar, stabbing someone, throwing a rock at a person, or shooting a firearm at someone.

In the case of shooting a person with a firearm, the intentional act is the pulling of the trigger, the purpose or knowledge with substantial certainty is that the bullet will hit the intended target, or thinking that the bullet won’t hit but you are trying to scare the target, and the harmful contact is the bullet hitting the person you intended to hit. Transferred intent also comes into play as well. If you were trying to hit person “A”, but accidently hit person “B”, you will still be liable to person “B” for a battery as if you hit person “A.” Further, as mentioned above, if you are discharging a firearm with the intention that it will only scare a person, say you are shooting at the ground, but the bullet deflects and hits the person, you will be liable for a battery because your intent was to cause imminent apprehension of being shot to the person who was actually shot.

B) Assault with a Firearm

The elements of assault are like those of a battery, only no contact occurs. Restatement 2d of Torts, § 21 (LexisNexis, 2016). So for an assault, there must be (1) and intentional act; (2) with the purpose or knowledge with substantial certainty that the act will; (3) cause a harmful or offensive contact or imminent apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact. Id.

Going back to the shooting at the ground hypothetical, if the bullet does go into the dirt and does not hit the person, the shooter will be liable for an assault. This is because the person being shot at is in imminent apprehension of being shot, which was the shooter’s intent, and is never actually shot. An assault also occurs if the shooter is trying to hit a person, but has horrible aim and misses, or if he is pulling the trigger but the gun is empty. However, these hypotheticals are not assaults if the person being shot at is not in imminent apprehension of being shot, i.e. the victim does not know he is being shot at during the time of the shooting.

C) Negligent Shooting

A negligent shooting is different from an assault and battery altogether. In Missouri, the law requires a standard of the highest degree of care for users of firearms. Chavez v. Cedar Fair, LP, 450 S.W.3d 291, 296 (Mo. 2014). “The phrase 'highest degree of care' means that degree of care that a very careful person would use under the same or similar circumstances." Id. This means that when you handle a firearm, you are expected to handle it with the highest degree of care like a firearms instructor or a well-trained peace officer. “The ‘general negligence’ theory is premised on basic negligence principles of duty, breach of duty, and injury proximately caused by the breach of duty.” In re Revisions to MAI-Civil, 2016 Mo. LEXIS 115, at 24 (Apr. 15, 2016). Proximate causation is defined as the “natural and probable consequence” of the negligent act and is determined based on a foreseeability test. Nail v. Husch Blackwell Sanders, LLP, 436 S.W.3d 556, 563 (Mo. 2014).

As an illustration, we will look a hunting scenario. A hunter is in his deer stand taking aim at a deer. However, the deer is uphill from his stand and the hunter knows missing the deer with his high caliber rifle means the projectile will travel a long distance before it goes into the ground and could injure someone. This is called a “skyline shot” and every hunter is taught to avoid skyline shots in their Missouri Conservation hunter certification course. (Missouri Hunter Ed., 2016). The hunter takes the skyline shot anyway, misses, and the bullet goes over the hill and strikes a victim a couple hundred yards away. The hunter will be held liable for a negligent shooting because the hunter has a duty to use the highest degree of care when handling the rifle, breached his duty by taking the unsafe skyline shot, and the breach of his duty was the legal cause of the victim’s injury which was foreseeable by the hunter when setting up the shot.

If instead the deer is downhill and a safe shot for the hunter, but the bullet deflects off the deer in an unpredictable manner, hitting another person who is clearly out of the line of fire, the hunter will not be liable for a negligent shooting because he handled the rifle to the highest degree of care and the deflection off the deer is unforeseeable.

D) Absolute Defense

There is an absolute defense available that Missouri provides for shootings that a court determines to be justified. When a person uses deadly force in self-defense or defense of others, and is justified in doing so, they can invoke Missouri statute 563.074, which provides an absolute defense against any criminal and civil remedies available. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.074 (LexisNexis, 2016).

1. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 563.016, a person who uses force as described in sections 563.031, 563.041, . . . 563.051 . . . is justified in using such force and such fact shall be an absolute defense to criminal prosecution or civil liability.

Id. This statute also provides attorney fees, court costs, and other reasonable expenses for those that successfully use this defense.

2. The court shall award attorney’s fees, court costs, and all reasonable expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant has an absolute defense as provided in subsection 1 of this section

Id. Exactly when a court will deem the use of deadly force as justified will be discussed in the next section.

2. Under Missouri Law, when does a person have the right to use deadly force?

Under Missouri Law, self-defense occurs where physical or deadly force is used to prevent an unlawful, imminent threat of physical or lethal injury. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.031 (LexisNexis, 2016). Self-defense is a justification acting as an affirmative defense to a crime, giving the defendant the burden of introducing the issue and the prosecution the burden of defeating the justification beyond a reasonable doubt. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.031(5). To discuss the legal use of deadly force in Missouri, the use of physical force must be discussed preliminary as it sets out the foundation for deadly force.

Under Missouri Statute § 563.031, “a person may . . . use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he . . . reasonably believes such force to be necessary to defend himself . . . or a third person from what he . . . reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful force by such other person.” Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.031(1). This defense does not exist if the actor is the initial aggressor, unless he withdraws from the fight and communicates it, or he is a peace officer. Id. Also this defense will fail if in the case of using physical force to protect another, the actor reasonably believed the circumstances to be a situation in which the person being protected is not justified in using the same amount of force to protect himself.Id.

“‘Deadly force’, [is] physical force which the actor uses with the purpose of causing or which he or she knows to create a substantial risk of causing death or serious physical injury.” Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.011(1) (LexisNexis, 2016). Generally speaking, a person may not use deadly force in the situations designated in § 563.031(1) unless one of three additional circumstances are involved: (1) The person defending himself/herself reasonably believes deadly force is necessary to protect himself, or herself or her unborn child, or third person against death, serious physical injury, or any forcible felony; (2) deadly force can also be used against a person who unlawfully enters, remains after unlawfully entering, or attempts to unlawfully enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle lawfully occupied by the person in defense; (3) deadly force may be used against a person who unlawfully enters, remains after unlawfully entering, or attempts to unlawfully enter private property that is owned or leased by an individual in defense of such. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.031(2).

Self defense grants a defender the privilege to use deadly force in the effort to defend himself against personal harm threatened by the unlawful act of another, if the defender has reasonable cause to believe that (1) there is immediate danger and threatened harm will occur; (2) the harm threatened is death or serious bodily injury; and (3) deadly force is necessary to overcome the harm as reasonably perceived. In addition, to invoke this privilege, the defender must "have done everything in his power, consistent with his own safety, to avoid the danger, . . . and he must retreat, if retreat is practicable", before responding to the threatened harm with deadly force.


State v. Hafeli, 715 S.W.2d 524, 528 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986); quoting State v. Ivicsics, 604 S.W.2d 773, 776 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980); State v. Sanders, 556 S.W.2d 75, 76 (Mo. Ct. App. 1977); State v. Jackson, 522 S.W.2d 317, 319 (Mo. Ct. App. 1975). For situations (2) and (3) of section 563.031(2); in a dwelling, residence, vehicle lawfully occupied, or private property owned or leased, a person does not have the duty to retreat. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.031(3). This is commonly referred to as “the Castle Doctrine.” Thus for situations that fall under subsection (1) of section 563.031(2), the person defending himself must try to retreat if possible and safe before the use of deadly force is justifiable.

A person may also use physical force in defending personal property, but can only use deadly force for such if it falls into one of the three categories described in section 563.031(2) above. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.041 (LexisNexis, 2016). Missouri also grants the use of force in a private person’s making an arrest. A person may use the reasonable physical force necessary to make an arrest if instructed to by someone he or she reasonably believes has the authority to make an arrest or prevent escape from custody. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.051(1) (LexisNexis, 2016). A person may also use the necessary physical force to make an arrest or prevent escape on their own account if they reasonably believe that the person they are arresting committed a crime and the person they arrest in fact actually did commit a crime. Id at § 563.051(2).

A person may use deadly force in making an arrest or preventing an escape if (1) they are justified in doing so based on the three categories in 563.031(2); (2) he reasonably believes he is authorized to and is directed to or authorized by a law enforcement officer to use deadly force; or (3) he reasonably believes deadly force is necessary to affect the arrest of a person who, in his presence, committed a class A felony or murder, or is attempting escape by use of a deadly weapon. Id at § 563.051(3).

Another situation where Missouri grants the use of force is when the actor is a person responsible for the operation of or the maintaining order in a vehicle or other carrier of passengers and the actor reasonably believes that force is necessary to prevent interference with its operation or maintenance of order in the vehicle. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.061(3) (LexisNexis, 2016). Deadly force may be used only when the actor reasonably believes it necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury. Id.

Missouri has a bill currently awaiting Governor Nixon’s approval that will expand the use of deadly force: Missouri Senate Bill No. 656 (SB 656). SB 656 has two primary changes in regards to the use of deadly force in § 563.031. SB 656, pg. 5 (98th General Assembly, 2016). First, SB 656 modifies the castle doctrine by allowing those legally invited by the property or dwelling owner to use deadly force against intruders. SB 656, pg. 5. Second, SB 656 adds the “stand your ground” law by getting rid of the duty to retreat for self-defense purposes when the actor is at anyplace he or she has a right to be at. Id.

In summary, there are many occasions where Missouri authorizes the use of deadly force, whether it’s from an immediate threat of serious bodily injury, a person is invading a home or private property and posing an unlawful threat of injury, a person is effecting an arrest and justified by law enforcement, or even a bus driver or airplane pilot trying to maintain control and safety in their vehicle against a deadly threat. With that being said, there are also some restrictions that occur such as the duty to retreat in cases not involving your castle (home, vehicle, or private property). Further, just because deadly force is justified in a criminal trial, it does not bar any remedies available in civil trial, unless the absolute defense, section 563.074, is successfully made. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.016 (LexisNexis, 2016).

3. Under Missouri Law, does a person have the ability to conceal and carry and open carry a firearm and what are the guidelines involved?

A) Conceal and Carry

Under Missouri Statute 571.030(1.1, 4), it is a crime to carry concealed a knife, firearm, blackjack, or other lethal weapons unless authorized by a permit pursuant to Missouri Statutes 571.101 to 571.121, a valid conceal and carry endorsement issued before August 28, 2013, or a valid permit or endorsement to conceal and carry a firearm issued by another state or political subdivision. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.030(1), (4) (LexisNexis, 2016). This means people in Missouri do not have a constitutional right to conceal and carry, but that Missouri grants a process to gain the ability to legally carry a concealed firearm.

Missouri Statute 571.101 discusses in depth the application process for a Missouri issued conceal and carry permit. To qualify, a person must be a citizen or permanent resident of the United States, at least nineteen years of age or eighteen if serving in the US Armed Forces, and must also be a Missouri resident or member of the US Armed Forces stationed in Missouri or a spouse of such. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.101(2) (LexisNexis, 2016). There are also a number of crimes and prior types of conduct listed in RSMo 571.101(2) that a person must be cleared of to qualify for a permit. Id.

If qualified for a permit under 571.101, a person then must undergo a firearms training and safety course to meet the requirements of 571.111. There are two paths to meet the requirements of 571.111; first, under subsection (1), there are certain jobs that involve firearms training and safety courses such as being a peace officer that qualify you; and the second, under subsection (2), there are training classes, that must be at least eight hours in length, where you learn conceal and carry law, proper handling, safety, and cleaning of a pistol, and also have to pass a live fire test with a semi-auto handgun or revolver, shooting twenty rounds at a B-27 silhouette target seven yards away. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.111(1), (2) (LexisNexis, 2016).

Once an individual who is qualified under RSMo 571.101 and meets the requirements of RSMo 571.111, he may apply for a conceal carry permit through his county or city’s sheriff. Mo. Rev. Stat.§ 571.101 (3). Upon receipt of a conceal carry permit application, the sheriff will undergo a series of background checks:

The sheriff shall conduct an inquiry of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System within three working days after submission of the properly completed application for a concealed carry permit. If no disqualifying record is identified by these checks at the state level, the fingerprints shall be forwarded to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a national criminal history record check. Upon receipt of the completed report from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System and the response from the Federal Bureau of Investigation national criminal history record check, the sheriff shall examine the results and, if no disqualifying information is identified, shall issue a concealed carry permit within three working days.

Id at § 571.101(5). Once a permit is issued, it will remain valid for five years before a renewal is necessary. Id at § 571.101(1). When carrying a concealed firearm, section 571.121(1) requires that the conceal carry permit or endorsement must also be on the person. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.121(1) (LexisNexis, 2016). In addition, a state or federal issued photo identification card should also be carried in case a peace officer asks for the conceal carry permit/endorsement, the identification card will also be required. However; failure to comply with section 571.121 is not a criminal offense, but rather can be a citation up to thirty-five dollars. Id.

Some other statutes to be aware of include 571.030(5) (concealing and carrying while intoxicated), 571.104 (discussing revocation and renewal of a permit), 571.107 (where one can and cannot conceal and carry a firearm with a permit), 571.114 (denial of a permit and the appeals process that can be taken), and 571.117 (revocation of ineligible permit holders). Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 571.030(2); 571.104; 571.107; 571.114; 571.117 (LexisNexis, 2016). Also RSMo § 160.665 permits school districts to designate teachers and administrators as school protection officers who can—if they have a conceal carry permit and pass a POST commission approved school protection officer training program—conceal and carry on school grounds. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 160.665 (LexisNexis, 2016).

Missouri also allows nineteen-year-olds and older, or eighteen and older if in or honorably discharged from a US Military Branch, to keep a lawfully possessed firearm in the passenger compartment of their vehicle. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.030(3). Missouri also allows conceal and carrying of a firearm on your person without a permit if you are lawfully in pursuit of game (hunting) and have an additional firearm or projectile weapon that is exposed. Id. A person may also conceal and carry without a permit inside their dwelling or upon premises over which the actor has possession, authority or control. Id.

An important lawsuit in the field of conceal and carry currently underway involves a University of Missouri School of Law faculty member, Professor Royce de R. Barondes. Professor Barondes is currently suing the University of Missouri (Mizzou) for prohibiting conceal and carrying on campus. Professor Barondes is seeking two different injunctive reliefs; (1) to be allowed to store his firearm in a locked car and out of view when the car is parked on campus pursuant to RSMo § 571.030(6) and Missouri Constitution Art. I § 23; and (2) to be allowed to conceal and carry his firearm on campus pursuant to Missouri Constitution Art. I § 23. Barondes v. Wolfe, (Pl.'s 1st Am. Compl. p. 15-18, Nov. 6, 2015). RSMo § 571.030(6) provides that the state cannot prohibit state employees from keeping their firearm hidden in their locked car when it is parked on state property. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.030(6). Missouri Constitution Art. I § 23 provides:

That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms, ammunition, and accessories typical to the normal function of such arms, in defense of his home, person, family and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned. The rights guaranteed by this section shall be unalienable. Any restriction on these rights shall be subject to strict scrutiny and the state of Missouri shall be obligated to uphold these rights and shall under no circumstances decline to protect against their infringement.

Mo. Const. Art. I, § 23 (emphasis added). Both laws seem to be 100% in Professor Barondes’ favor, however Mizzou has favorable laws too. Mizzou claims their ban on firearms is narrowly tailored to create a safe environment for students, which they believe passes the strict scrutiny test. Barondes v. Wolfe, (Answer. p. 1-2, Oct. 16, 2015). Mizzou also utilizes RSMo § 571.107(1) subdivision (10) that says those with a conceal carry permit are not allowed to carry on the grounds of higher education institutions unless the governing body of the institution gives consent. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.107(1).

While this case is being played out, there is also Missouri Senate Bill No. 656 (SB 656) that may change the law on conceal and carrying in addition to the use of deadly force as discussed earlier. Mainly, SB 656 modifies section 571.030, making conceal and carry of a firearm, knife, blackjack, or other lethal weapon unlawful only when taken into an area where firearms are already restricted even with a conceal and carry permit under section 571.107. SB 656, pg. 5 (98th General Assembly, 2016). This changes the status of being able to conceal carry in Missouri from an ability to carry, to a right to carry. While this bill makes conceal and carrying a firearm in general not unlawful, it still leaves in place the ability to obtain a conceal and carry permit, but with a longer period of being valid, including 10 years, 25 years, and for life. Id at pg. 27-28. The question then, is why obtain a conceal carry permit and pay the price for one when conceal and carry of a firearm is legal and free without a permit?

Regardless of a justification to still have conceal carry permits when constitutional carry exists, if SB 656 even passes, currently conceal and carry is allowed in Missouri if one obtains a permit pursuant to RSMo §§ 571.101 to 571.121, or has a valid endorsement issued prior to August 28, 2013, or has a valid permit or endorsement issued from another state or political subdivision.

B) Open Carry

Unlike conceal and carry, Missouri does not have a statute prohibiting open carrying of a firearm statewide. However, Missouri Statute § 21.750 allows local political subdivisions to pass ordnances that prohibit it. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 21.750(3) (LexisNexis, 2016). Even if a local ordinance prohibits open carrying, any person with a conceal carry permit or endorsement from Missouri, or from any state that Missouri recognizes, can open carry so long as they have their conceal and carry permit or endorsement on their person while open carrying and display it if demanded by law enforcement. Id. Finally, “[i]n the absence of any reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity, no person carrying a concealed or unconcealed firearm shall be disarmed or physically restrained by a law enforcement officer unless under arrest.” Id.

Therefore, open carrying is allowed in Missouri, but before doing so check with your local ordinances to see if it is prohibited. An important thing to note when open carrying is that the firearm will draw attention from your peers and people may call the police on you even though it is legal.

4. Under Federal Law, what are the rules and requirements when flying in the United States with a firearm and ammunition?

Going on a big game hunting trip, or maybe heading to a cool, go-fast tactical firearm training fun land in another state? Then this section is important to you. When traveling with a firearm, there are a couple Transportation Security Administration (TSA) rules that you must follow. The first step is to declare to the aircraft operator (airline), in writing or orally, that you will be traveling with an unloaded firearm, before you check your bag with the firearm. 49 C.F.R. § 1540.111(C)(2) (LexisNexis, 2016). Be sure to follow all the instructions given to you by the airline when you declare the firearm. In regards to the actual packing of the firearm, the gun must be unloaded, in a hard-sided container, and the hard sided container must be locked with a combo or key lock and only the passenger may know the combo or have the key. Id. Section 1540.111 does not prohibit the carrying of ammunition in checked luggage or in the same hard-sided, locked container as the unloaded firearm. Id.

When you check your firearm with the luggage, you will fill out a declaration for the firearm stating it is unloaded and a TSA operator will inspect the gun to make sure it is unloaded. To make the inspection easier and faster, a firearm cable lock (usually comes with the firearm when purchased) should be placed in the action. TSA is allowed to check the hard-sided case thoroughly, but cannot in any way operate the firearm beyond moving it to check the container. If the TSA inspecting agent deems it necessary, they may have a law enforcement officer operate the action to make sure there is no ammunition in it.

Once the inspection is complete, lock the case and make sure it is secure, and the agent will hand you a slip containing the details of the checked firearm, keep the slip. Upon arrival, if the firearm was checked outside of bagged luggage, it may not come out of the luggage carousel. Instead the airport may place with the customer service desk next to the carousel just to ensure nobody else can take it, and your slip that the TSA agent gave you at check-in will be used to retrieve the firearm.

With regards to ammunition, each airline has their requirements and limits. TSA requires that the ammunition is checked and stored in boxes or other containers designed to carry small amounts of ammunition. 49 C.F.R. § 175.10(a)(8) (LexisNexis, 2016). The most common airline limit for the amount of ammunition is five kilograms (11 lbs.). The magazines or clips for the firearm must be inside the same hard-sided case as the firearm, regardless if they are loaded with ammunition or not.

The last thing to know when traveling with firearms in the US is to make sure the firearm and accessories for it are not prohibited in the destination state. While Missouri is very pro-firearm, there are some states that prohibit common firearm parts or accessories such as California, which prohibits magazines that can hold more than ten rounds. Cal. Penal Code §§ 16740; 32310 (LexisNexis, 2016). Finally, be sure to memorize the maker, model, and serial number of the firearm in case it does get lost. If need be, take a picture of the necessary engravings/serial number plate/bar code stamped onto the firearm.

Conclusion

When it comes to firearms, Missouri is a state that affords its citizens with plentiful rights and access to them. However, Missouri requires its citizens to use the highest standard of care when handling a firearm. The State of Missouri also holds those liable for intentionally and sometimes unintentionally discharging a firearm in a wrongful manner against another, but protects those who use it for self-defense, even awarding all the costs of litigation in a civil trial if the use of force is deemed justified. Missouri also allows its citizens to obtain the ability of conceal and carrying a firearm and does not prohibit open carry. Change is coming to Missouri in a couple of areas, including use of deadly force and conceal and carry laws with the Senate Bill 656 underway and the pending conceal and carry lawsuit against the University of Missouri. Finally, the Transportation Security Administration allows US citizens to travel from state to state with firearms, only requiring a couple easy steps to follow with regards to gear, pre-check, and departure.

Table of Authorities

Bills:

SB 656, pg. 5 (98th General Assembly,2016)

Cases:

Barondes v. Wolfe, (Pl.'s 1st Am. Compl, Nov. 6, 2015)

Barondes v. Wolfe, (Answer, Oct. 16, 2015).

Chavez v. Cedar Fair, LP, 450 S.W.3d 291 (Mo. 2014)

In re Revisions to MAI-Civil, 2016 Mo. LEXIS 115 (Apr. 15, 2016)

Nail v. Husch Blackwell Sanders, LLP, 436 S.W.3d 556 (Mo. 2014)

Penn-Star Ins. Co. v. Griffey, 306 S.W.3d 591 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010)

State v. Hafeli, 715 S.W.2d 524 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986)

State v. Ivicsics, 604 S.W.2d 773 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980)

State v. Jackson, 522 S.W.2d 317 (Mo. Ct. App. 1975)

State v. Sanders, 556 S.W.2d 75 (Mo. Ct. App. 1977)

Codes:

49 C.F.R. § 1540.111 (LexisNexis, 2016)

49 C.F.R. § 175.10 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Constitutional Law

Mo. Const. Art. I, § 23 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Statutes:

Cal. Penal Code § 16740 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Cal. Penal Code § 32310 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 21.750 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 160.665 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.011 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.016 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.026 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.031 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.041 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.051 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.061 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 563.074 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.030 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.101 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.104 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.107 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.111 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.114 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.117 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.121 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Restatement 2d of Torts, § 13 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Restatement 2d of Torts, § 21 (LexisNexis, 2016)

Websites:

Missouri Hunter Ed Course Hunting Incidents, https://www.hunter- ed.com/missouri/studyguide/hunting-incidents/20102501_700079140/ (last visited Aug 10, 2016)

Categories:

Contact Us Today

All Consultations are Free and Confidential
    • Please enter your name.
    • This isn't a valid phone number.
    • Please enter your email address.
      This isn't a valid email address.
    • Please make a selection.
    • Please enter a message.