Previously: HB 1833: staging a Leonard Bernstein musical (February 27, 2012)

Representative Wanda Brown (r) got some national attention when HB 1621 passed the House and was sent to the Senate:

HB 1621

Specifies that it will be an unlawful employment practice to discriminate against an individual because he or she has a concealed carry endorsement or uses a firearm for a lawful purpose

Sponsor: Brown, Wanda (116)

Co-Sponsor: Franz, Ward (151) … et al.

Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2012

LR Number: 4902L.02P

Last Action: 3/08/2012 – Reported to the Senate and First Read (S)

Bill String: HB 1621

The comments at Wonkette are priceless:

PRY THIS JOB FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS

Missouri House Backs Making Gun Nuts Protected Class

by Rebecca Schoenkopf

12:16 pm March 9, 2012

[….]

I’m grateful someone finally did something about this. I can’t count the number of jobs I didn’t get because I carried a gun to the interview.

Interviewee: I gots me about a hunnert assault rifles and a shit-pile of ammunition stockpiled at home. Nobody gonna fuck with me.

Interviewer: According to state law I can’t let that influence my decision to hire you.

Interviewee: So I get the job?

Interviewer: Hell no. But it’s not about the guns. I think you’re gay, and that’s something the state says we CAN discriminate against.

Can employers still “morally object” to paying for coverage of self-inflicted gunshot wounds and/or accidental discharges?

This will make the next Accounting vs. I.T. touch football game more interesting.

The bill as perfected:

SECOND REGULAR SESSION

[PERFECTED]

HOUSE BILL NO. 1621

96TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVES BROWN (116) (Sponsor) AND FRANZ (Co-sponsor).

4902L.02P           D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To amend chapter 571, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to discrimination against persons for the lawful carry or use of firearms.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

           Section A. Chapter 571, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 571.123, to read as follows:

           571.123. 1. It shall be an unlawful employment practice under section 213.055 for an employer, because an individual has a concealed carry endorsement or uses his or her firearm for lawful purposes including, but not limited to, self defense:

           (1) To fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to such individual’s compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment; or

           (2) To limit, segregate, or classify his or her employees or his or her applicants in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his or her status as an employee.

           2. This section shall not be interpreted to require employers to allow the carrying and use of weapons on their property except as mandated by other general law.

           3. Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to require an employer to grant preferential treatment to employees that hold concealed carry endorsements or own firearms.

“…Can employers still “morally object” to paying for coverage of self-inflicted gunshot wounds and/or accidental discharges?…”

If the bill becomes law:

…To fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to such individual’s compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment…

Is health insurance part of the compensation or privilege of employment? Not to republicans the way they’ve been carrying on.

Besides, Senator Roy Blunt (r) didn’t get his way.