Are they trying to squeeze in an inspection clause, either explicitly or by interpretation? Think they tried that a few years ago and sheriffs stated they didn’t have the manpower to do this and thought it was wrong. This came up in 2013 post-Sandy Hook with then-Rep. Alice Hausman's "assault ...

Lumpy wrote:Are they trying to squeeze in an inspection clause, either explicitly or by interpretation?

No.

I also think our 'Red Flag' laws, pardon me the 'Extreme Risk Protection Orders' (ERPO) laws that take guns away from people "when they are at risk of harming themselves or someone else" should be amended to include removing ALL of the above items from the individual too. After all, "...

Good God. A felony if you don't secure your guns? Meanwhile we let convicted felons out without bail for possessing firearms. It gets less desirable every day to stay in this God forsaken state. Starts as a misdemeanor, but depends on what happens and who is present. Current version of the bill her...

Bryan, do you have any comments on where we stand regarding this gun dog and mall carry? I know this has been a big topic of debate for years and as a gun owner I'm not sure if I should carry or not in the mall. Does it come down to needing a test case to see how the court would rule? For the recor...

The DFL's proposed "ban carry on government property & buildings" would cause signs to be posted in those areas - and then carrying past those signs would be a misdemeanor.

This is one of the bills that may still yet pass, we're waiting to see what the DFL will do.
b

Rip Van Winkle wrote:Maybe we should have a group outing there, see if they trespass the lot of us.

Too bad there's nothing there I want to see.

With a DFL trifecta in control, let's not do this right now.
b

Is this one still active? The bill? Yes - it's active until the session ends in May when they adjourn sine die. This bill hasn't had a hearing and deadline was yesterday, it doesn't have leadership support. So is this one "Zombie dead" then as Robb Describes the ones we don't think are go...

But banning lead shot? It's a proposal that indicates severe ignorance about what the actual problem is. Mr Strawser, what is the MNGOC's position on this bill? Here is some interesting info. Non-lead primers are a thing too. Is this proposed law also requiring non-lead primers along with the steel...

Holland&Holland wrote:Is this one still active?

The bill? Yes - it's active until the session ends in May when they adjourn sine die.

This bill hasn't had a hearing and deadline was yesterday, it doesn't have leadership support.

Amazing what happens when a Senator has a conversation with someone from the MN Gun Owners Caucus.
b

Hmmm I wasn’t able to find the official position posted. But then again, the site isn’t very mobile friendly so I didn’t spend a lot of time trying to track it down. Unfortunate about your position though. Really? This bill, among other things, removes protections from ranges currently protected un...

Markemp wrote:So no position until a bill is scheduled for a hearing? Makes sense.

That's not what i said. I said our positions are defined on these pages.

We oppose these two bills.
b

Our positions are always listed on our website.

BilL Tracker
https://gunowners.mn/tracker

Bills that are moving in 2024
https://gunowners.mn/2024

These bills have yet to be scheduled for a hearing.

Bryan

Lumpy wrote:Does MNGOC or GOA have a position on any of these?

Other than the NRA sucks?

No.