Omnibus gun bill under consideration in Senate

By Jackson Cooper, Missouri News Network

JEFFERSON CITY — Firearm legislation has emerged as a priority this legislative session, particularly among members of the hard-right Freedom Caucus.
The Republican supermajority in both houses of the Missouri General Assembly has solidified after previous years marked by infighting, meaning that legislation popular with party leadership and hard-liners is moving faster.
Heading into this week’s legislative break, only one firearm bill — Senate Bill 77 — had been debated extensively on the Senate floor.
Before the break, senators introduced a range of amendments to the bill, which are still pending a vote. The amendments would consolidate provisions from several firearm-related bills into one omnibus bill that combines a number of target issues for Missouri Republicans.

SB 77, sponsored by Sen. Adam Schnelting, R-St. Charles, seeks to allow concealed carry permit holders to possess weapons on public transportation.
Firearm possession of any kind on public transportation is currently a Class D felony in Missouri. If SB 77 becomes law, the offense would remain a felony for those not holding a valid concealed carry permit.
While serving in the Missouri House in 2022 and 2023, Schnelting sponsored identical legislation that was voted through the chamber but failed to pass the Senate.
In presenting SB 77 to the Senate Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety Committee, Schnelting said his bill would help people protect themselves on transportation.
“It’ll be a crime deterrent,” he said. “Allowing Missourians to carry on public transit means that criminals will think twice.”
Several firearms advocates testified in support of the bill, citing the training required to obtain a concealed carry permit as proof that permit holders are responsible enough to do so safely.
Officials with Bi-State Development, the group that runs St. Louis Metro’s light rail and bus system, testified in opposition to the bill at the February hearing. Kevin Scott, general manager of public safety for Bi-State, said the proposals in the bill would work against millions being spent to improve rider safety on MetroLink.
“Mass passenger conveyance is something that is different from a lot of other environments,” he said. “We’re spending millions and millions of dollars to fortify our platforms. … All of these positive things are happening.”
Fred Dreiling, who testified on behalf of the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority, outlined concerns that the bill would harm public safety as Kansas City prepares to host games in the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
“We understand the difficulties that happen around gun free zones, but this particular gun free zone is going down Main Street at 40 miles an hour,” Dreiling said.
SB 77 would additionally expand concealed carry protections in places of worship and would lessen the requirements for active-duty military to obtain a concealed carry permit. The bill would also lower the minimum age to obtain a concealed carry permit from 19 to 18. SB 77 remains on the Senate calendar.
House Bill 328, sponsored by Rep. Tim Taylor, R-Bunceton, is a near-identical bill that is making its way through the House. It has already passed the House General Laws Committee and is waiting for approval from the Rules Committee before it will be available for floor debate.

Several bills — one in the Senate and two in the House — have taken aim at preventing the enforcement of federal gun seizure laws in Missouri.
House Bills 434 and 459 are nearly identical, and are sponsored by Rep. Bill Hardwick, R-Dixon and Rep. Mazzie Christensen, R-Bethany, respectively. The bills would not allow for guns to be seized under red flag laws unless a court proceeding determined that an individual was engaging in criminal activity.
This measure would be preemptive, as Missouri does not have red flag laws in place. Red flag laws allow a judge to temporarily seize an individual’s weapons based on concerns that the individual presents a danger.
Both bills were heard by the General Laws Committee in January but have not progressed since due to bipartisan concern.
A similar bill has been introduced in the Senate. Sponsored by Sen. Nick Schroer, R-O’Fallon, SB 142 would see federal red flag laws go unenforced in Missouri.
Like its counterparts in the House, SB 142 has failed to gain traction so far in the session. It has not yet been presented in committee.
SB 142, HB 434 and HB 459 contain similar language, and all three are dubbed the “Anti-Red Flag Gun Seizure Act.”

Two bills relating to the authority of political subdivisions to enforce firearm laws have been passed through the Senate’s Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety Committee.
The first, SB 23, is sponsored by Sen. Rick Brattin, R-Harrisonville. Known as the Second Amendment Protection Act, Brattin’s bill allows the state to avoid enforcing federal gun laws.
This is the second time that SAPA has been through the legislature. The first iteration, signed into law in 2021, was eventually declared unconstitutional in a federal circuit court following a Department of Justice lawsuit. The new version of SAPA is substantially similar to the 2021 SAPA, though it excludes the language that was specified as problematic by the courts.
“This isn’t coming and reinventing the wheel,” Brattin said in a January committee hearing. “This is just clarifying and making it in line with what the Eighth (District) courts have done.”
In particular, Brattin said the bill removes explicit references to federal law enforcement agents, and removes language invoking the Tenth Amendment as a defense against Second Amendment infringements.
Critics of the bill include representatives of Missouri sheriffs and police chiefs, who said in hearing testimony that the bill would inhibit their ability to keep unregistered weapons off the streets.
“This type of legislation will hamper and create major obstacles for our officers and our deputies throughout the state to go and catch these bad guys,” Lewis County Sheriff David Parrish said.
Another bill concerning governmental authority, SB 74, seeks to remove an existing statute that allows political subdivisions to enforce laws restricting open carry. It is sponsored by Sen. Brad Hudson, R-Cape Fair. While the bill was voted through the public safety committee last month, it has yet to be placed on the Senate’s calendar.
Hudson has, however, introduced an amendment to Schnelting’s SB 77 that includes provisions identical to those in SB 74.

Under current Missouri law, teachers and administrators are eligible to train as school protection officers. Upon entering this optional program and receiving training, faculty members are eligible to conceal carry firearms and self-defense spray.
SB 792, proposed by Brattin, would expand this program to include school district employees more broadly. Employees included in this expanded classification would be subject to the same training currently required of teachers and administrators.
While SB 792 has not yet been referred to a committee, its provisions are included in a wide-ranging amendment to Hudson’s amendment to SB 77 that Brattin introduced during floor debate March 12. Senators have yet to vote on the amendment, which also includes proposed changes to self-defense laws and weapon modifications.

Another component of Brattin’s amendment focuses on expanding self-defense parameters. In effect, the amendment would make it more difficult to prosecute in cases where self-defense is claimed.
Under the provisions outlined in Brattin’s amendment, police officers are inhibited from making arrests unless probable cause of illegal use of force can be proven. The burden of proof is shifted to the prosecution in an expansion of gun users’ rights.
This particular provision drew the ire of Senate Democrats, who filibustered debate on SB 77’s proposed amendments as a result. Sen. Tracy McCreery, D-Olivette, dubbed the amendment as “shoot first, figure it out later,” to laughs from colleagues on the floor.

SB 273, sponsored by Schroer, proposes legalizing the purchase, sale and use of firearm suppressors. Suppressors — also known as silencers — stifle the sound of a weapon as it is fired, similar to the effect of a muffler on a car engine. Suppressors are prohibited under current law, along with machine guns, switchblade knives and short-barrel shotguns.
While SB 273 has yet to be presented in committee, similar provisions are included in Brattin’s proposed amendment to SB 77.