Good news. But if you haven't written, I think you still should. It will discourage any last minute, dark of the night "trickeration".
I'm pretty damned proud of myself. Here's what I wrote, plagiarizing liberally from you guys:
Under House File 2960 Minnesota State Representative Michael Paymar wants to require background checks at gun shows for sales between private sellers. (Dealers selling at gun shows already must conduct back ground checks.)
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms identifies gun shows as the source of fewer than 2% of the guns acquired by criminals. Virtually all of those guns are bought from licensed dealers by persons who have PASSED the federal background check. There is no "loophole," certainly none big enough to justify the burden this bill will place on Minnesota's 1.5 million gun owners.
A 2001 Bureau of Justice study of incarcerated inmates shows that less than ¾% obtained their guns from gun shows
Even if this bill were to become law, the number of crimes it would theoretically prevent is, statistically speaking, zero. Nationwide the actual numbers of crimes committed with guns purchased at gun shows which includes sales from dealers which do include background checks is statistically insignificant. The idea Rep Paymar is suggesting that subjecting one small subset of that already very small group to further scrutiny will reduce crime is absurd.
To say nothing of the generally proven fact that background checks, in general, do almost nothing to stop crime. They are only a redirection device. Criminals just go somewhere else.
By his own admission Michael Paymar has never been to a gun show (Star Tribune 3/4/2010)
Based on that I'm willing to wager Michael Paymar doesn't have the faintest idea how many gun shows there are per year in our state.
And I'm quite sure Michael Paymar doesn't know how many crimes were committed by buyers of guns from private parties at gun shows in the State of Minnesota.
It is already illegal for criminals to buy guns from anyone and for people to sell them to criminals. Is there proof that making something even more illegal than it already is makes it occur less often?
It would be better to require background checks for burglary tools like crowbars and hammers. That's where FAR more criminals get their guns; by stealing them.
So what we have is someone who has never been there, doesn't know if there really is a problem, and has no idea what the actual outcome of this proposed law would be.
Vote this down
Decrypt the points of departure and return your head slowly and you do not cancel your hair.