I think that this comes down to a common problem that we have citing to authority, in that it's very easy to cite when something is illegal. It can be difficult (sometimes impossible) to cite that something is legal. Rarely do laws explicitly outline legal actions, so the only cite is if there was a court case that set precedent. (For instance, can I open carry while chewing bubble gum? Can you cite any authority to prove your answer?).
That being said, activist judges don't particularly care, and could easily read "intent" into the age restriction on MO CCW's issuance to be applicable across all states permits, even though that isn't the wording. Heck, they've applied the CCW restrictions to open carry, and said the zoo is a school.
So I believe you won't be able to find anyone or anything that definitively settles this for you. Plain reading of the law cited shows is legal. Judges decisions are unpredictable. Decide the odds of you being "caught"/cited vs. the cost of defending the plain wording in court.