Missouri judge hears challenges to ballot measures

If votes are invalidated by this decision, it would set a terrible precedent. On the other hand, our constitution is a mess because of these ballot issues. Half the time they pass because the language is manipulative. It really needs to stop.

Case in point. To a lot of people, this sounds redundant and symbolic at first read. "What harm could it do?"

"The measure, upon voter approval, would establish the unalienable right of citizens to keep and bear arms, ammunition and accessories associated with the normal functioning of such arms, for the purpose of defense of one’s person, family, home and property"
http://ballotpedia.org/Missouri_Right_to_Bear_Arms,_Amendment_5_(August_2014)#Text_of_measure

"Unalienable" carries way more meaning than is implied.

No age limitations. No holds barred on weaponry as arms is not defined. Open carry anywhere. The only possible regulations would be for "convicted felons and those adjudged as mentally ill."
Stalkers, domestic abusers, and others with histories of violence who have pleaded to misdemeanors would be welcome to carry weapons anywhere they please. In a state deemed the alcohol mecca when it comes to fielding human subjects for alcohol research, alcoholism would not be a disqualifyer.

Sadly, I will be shocked if this doesn't pass even if the wording included all of those potential consequences.

The transportation tax has little to no chance of passing, no matter the wording, as long as "tax" remains in the summary.