Replies

Missouri: That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons. Art. I, § 23 (enacted 1945).
1820: "That the people have the right peaceably to assemble for their common good, and to apply to those vested with the powers of government for redress of grievances by petition or remonstrance; and that their right to bear arms in defence of themselves and of the State cannot be questioned." Art. XIII, § 3.
1865: Same as above, but with "the lawful authority of the State" instead of "the State." Art. I, § 8.
1875: "That the right of no citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power, when thereto legally summoned, shall be called into question; but nothing herein contained is intended to justify the practice of wearing concealed weapons." Art. II, § 17.

Thanks, Shooter. A perfect example how things get morphed. Reminds me of "Animal Farm."

The next change will probably look like this:

Missouri: That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, (*Insert change here) or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons. Art. I, § 23 (enacted 1945).

*INSERT: "except on days that fall on Saturday and Sunday in each month and other days that fall on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of each week;" (2004)

I think the 1820 clause was sufficient. Who gave gummint the right to question the rights of the people of MO? But then, I think that happened in every state. New Mexico is similar.