DRISKILL ABANDONS CONCEALED-WEAPONS BILL

JEFFERSON CITY - Two days before the end of the 1992 legislative session, Rep. Joe Driskill called off his efforts to enact a law that would allow certain individuals to carry concealed weapons in Missouri.

But the Poplar Bluff Democrat vowed the issue was not dead and promised to spend the summer trying to reach a consensus with opponents of the bill and bring it back next year.

Senate Majority Leader J.B. "Jet" Banks of St. Louis told Driskill Wednesday that he would not take up any bill that contained the concealed-weapons provision. Driskill had considered attaching the measure as an amendment to crime and drug bills that are both regarded as priorities for the session.

But Driskill said he did not want to kill those bills by adding his amendment.

"Sen. Banks was simply not going to take it up," said Driskill.

"I gain more advantage today by negotiating in good faith over the summer with opponents than going down in flames in the Senate this year and killing several good bills in the process."

Driskill said that law enforcement officials who initially opposed the bill have agreed to continue working toward an acceptable compromise.

He said a joint committee will be appointed during the interim and one of the things it will be looking at is the concealed-weapons issue.

Driskill contends that Sen. Banks is wrong in his assessment that the provision would increase crime and violence in the state.

"I think we can write it in such a way to create less violence in St. Louis and not more violence," said Driskill. "I see it as a deterrent to violence."

Driskill said some senators "had very little courage" by avoiding the issue this session. He said some senators "would have voted for it, had it come up, but did not want to have to vote on it."

The gun bill was controversial and brought statewide attention to the fifth-term legislator. Driskill said although he expected some attention, "I did not expect the fever pitch. I did not expect the opponents to be hysterical, and in some cases, totally unreasonable on this bill.

"But I'm surprised more by the level of support than the level of opposition."

Driskill said his calls ran heavily in favor of the provision. He said that he had more constituent calls on this issue than any other. Driskill said that was the same situation for many other House members as well.