Earlier this year Missouri passed a constitutional amendment strengthening gun rights. For background:
Missouri voters in August approved Constitutional Amendment 5 with greater than 60 percent support. It states that any restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms "shall be subject to strict scrutiny," but adds that the measure should not be construed to prevent laws limiting the gun rights of "convicted violent felons" or people determined by a court to be a danger because of mental illness. The measure now is part of Article 1, Section 23, of the Missouri Constitution.
http://www.maryvilledailyforum.com/...
Now a convicted drug dealer says that means his non-violet felony background means he should be able to own and possess firearms.
Guess what the author of the legislation (who by the way is running for Attorney General) thinks of that?
In January 2013, Merritt was charged with drug possession and three counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm for having a revolver, shotgun and rifle. The gun charges were based on the fact that Merritt had been convicted in federal court in 1986 for felony drug distribution.
[snip]
Based on the constitution's new "strict scrutiny" requirement, "the state does not have a compelling government interest in banning all convicted felons under all circumstances from possessing firearms for life," Merritt's attorney, Assistant Public Defender Matthew Huckeby, wrote in a Supreme Court brief.
It sucks when the wrong kind of people exercise their right to bear arms apparently. It is especially problematic when you are the guy who wrote the amendment and are now running for Attorney General:
[State Sen. Kurt] Schaefer, a Republican from Columbia who is running for attorney general, urged the court in a written brief to uphold the prohibition on felons possessing firearms. He argued that felons aren't truly "citizens" and thus shouldn't receive gun-rights protections.
[snip]
Schaefer said the measure's specific allowance for laws limiting the gun rights of violent felons was not meant to imply that guns couldn't also be restricted for nonviolent felons.
Who would have guessed that a law making it easier for people to own guns would mean that more people would be able to own guns?
If I were running against Sen. Schaefer the ads practically write themselves.