All the Time

28 09 2016

Lamar

A Constitutional amendment to put the state on DST all year.

As if the USDOT and the Federal judiciary is going to sign off on us being an hour ahead of every state that borders us for about four and a half months out of every year.

The strange part here is that I can’t yet discern any hidden agenda or ulterior motive for why Mike Kelley is pushing this quixotic matter.





That’s What Happens When You Don’t Have That Many

21 09 2016

Jefferson City

pd-hispanics

Notice in the caption, of the two people dancing, one lives where I currently live, and the other lives where I lived before that.  It’s as if the P-D is trolling me personally.

Quite a few people in a few towns in southwest Missouri might not be so sanguine about our state’s successful Hispanic integration.





Change of Fortunes, Along With Venue

20 09 2016

Montgomery City

Trial moving from Montgomery County to St. Louis City.  Since it’s the prosecutors in Montgomery County that will be handling the case, in spite of the venue change, they will still pursue the death penalty.  However, the chances of that happening have gone way down because the jury will be a St. Louis City one.





Forty-Nine Counterexamples

20 09 2016

Jefferson City

I don’t buy the notion that script opiates are necessarily a gateway to heroin.

We keep hearing that canard because Missouri is the only state that doesn’t have script monitoring.

But that means the other 49 states do.  Are heroin deaths increasing or decreasing in those states?

(Drops the mic)





No ConCarry (Update: As Such)

14 09 2016

Jefferson City

The veto session starts today, and Nixon’s veto of SB 656 could be overturned before sunset.

Everyone keeps saying that SB 656 contains Constitutional Carry (concarry), and they’ve been saying it ever since this thing was born in committee, but I’m not seeing it and never have seen it.  Unless I’m missing something.  All I read is a bunch of tweaks.

Maybe they keep falsely claiming it has concarry because they don’t want it to pass for one or more of the tweaks it does make, and claiming it has concarry is the best way to gin up opposition. But I don’t know which one(s) of these tweaks are so horrible or objectionable.

UPDATE

Okay, I’ve asked around, and while there is technically no concarry language in SB 656, what it does do is effectively and on the sly implement concarry by removing the line-item in the list of actions that constitute unlawful use of a weapon (UUW) offenses that refers to carrying a concealed weapon (CCW) without a permit.  This blog’s very first post on September 15, 2003 was on the day of, and about, the General Assembly adopting our initial CCW provisions, and since it happened in September, you can deduce that it happened on an override of a gubernatorial veto.  Part of that package was to eliminate the stand-alone criminal offense of carrying a concealed weapon, and putting carrying without a permit as one of the many items in the UUW laundry list.  Now that it has been taken out, or it will be in about a month, there is no possible criminal sanction for carrying without a permit, except…

…What it does not accomplish is to allow CCW in places where carrying even with a valid permit is overtly legally prohibited, or privately prohibited by the establishment owner or agent per his latitude via state law. And it definitely doesn’t change the list of firearms-prohibited individuals per state or Federal law, meaning that firearms-prohibited individuals can’t legally carry even under SB 656 because they can’t legally possess, and they couldn’t get a permit anyway.

One thing it does is that while it removes carrying without a permit from the list of UUW violations, it adds one to it: What it does is that if you’re caught both knowingly carrying and knowingly possessing enough controlled substances that on the face of the action violate state felony PWID laws, (even before a conviction on that particular PWID action or even in the absence of any PWID conviction), that becomes a UUW line-item category. I actually remember that being shoved into SB 656 during hearings and markup, but now that I know that it goes in while CCW-sans-permit goes out, I now think it’s sort of a legal make-good. Remember, more than five years ago in this medium, I expressed my opposition to concarry in NAM-heavy states for technical reasons, and I think that this new UUW provision mostly compensates for those concerns.

The permit process is still in its same form, and that you will need to go through if you want reciprocity with other states, that is, the other states that recognizes Missouri’s permit.  Illinois still isn’t one of them.

Long and short is that if you’re not a prohibited person and you don’t carry in prohibited places and you’re not in the dope dealing and transporting business, SB 656 does effectively give you concarry.

Confoosled yet?





Wasted Space and Wasted Time

12 09 2016

Jefferson City

I ask of thee, spirited protesters who made a lot of noise in the Capitol rotunda this morning:

Why there, why now?

You say you want a $15 an hour minimum wage.  Yeah, the General Assembly could do that.  But it won’t, because that is way above the labor market equilibrium in rural Missouri.  You also say you want union organization and representation for low wage service workers.  If you really wanted that, you’d be organizing that in those work places and among those employees.  And you’d be doing it in a state with a union-friendly political and legal culture — If the General Assembly had passed a RTW bill this spring, one that Nixon would have vetoed, and the General Assembly was going to try to override the veto during this week’s veto session, (and I’ll be in Jefferson City for only one day), then I could see rallying there.  But there was no RTW bill this session.  Even if RTW does happen, it wouldn’t make the unionization of fast feeder employees that much harder, if at all.





“Super Subgroup”

8 09 2016

Jefferson City

DESE releases preliminary 2015-16 MAP data.

Same old same old.  That pesky gap just won’t go away.

In the initial report, DESE combines blacks, Hispanics, low income students, disabled students and English learners, all groups that for various reasons would score lower than native-born whites, into one big category of the disadvantaged, termed here the super subgroup.  That’s going to create a problem down the line.  After all, on which side of the ledger do you put transgender students?  It’s already a hassle to figure out which restrooms and locker rooms they should use.