Paymar's "gun Show Loophole" bill rears its ugly head again

[princewally]

I got an e-mail from MN GORCA about this and they have some stuff from a couple of reports that look to be good things to help nail this bill. I can't find links to the stuff they claim including one from some outfit at Mankato State. Anyone have the links to those studies?

University of MD study:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cac ... VBJKmnJ74A

ATF study:
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf

[hunter722]

Word I got was that it was shut down on a vote and should be DOA.

[Don L]

Well, it didn't pass. The "other side" was given a chance to back up their stats. Because of that, John C. was also given a chance to speak before the vote. He did a good job. I believe that, and the emails, etc. did some good. We were definately outnumbered.

[Pat]

We were definately outnumbered.

By whom? Folks showing up at the hearing, those testifying, or those members expressing our view from the committee's perspective? Just want to know where to direct the congratulatory/flame mail...

[nyffman]

So far, 0 comments. Do you think they'll be approving many of our comments?

not sure, but I bet they just got at least 5 comments against the article. Maybe its some slow moderation until they get an Anti to respond with something positive.

My reply to the idiocy of poster #2 did not get past the moderators. Using sarcasm, I expressed my displeasure with him and his views. Maybe I should have added "BBBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA".

[plblark]

Thank you to those who were able to get to the meeting.

[Don L]

Those present. This happened at another event I attended at the Capitol back when it looked like the MPPA was going to pass. One of the "Million Moms" made a comment about "So, where's all the gun supporters?" The reply she got was "They're all at work!" She didn't say anything else. I realize that it's tough for most everyone to get time off every time these things come up. I consider myself fortunate when I can get there.

[plblark]

http://www.carryforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=15178&p=172860#p172860

Checks on all buyers at gun shows rejected

Last update: March 10, 2010 - 8:51 PM

A proposal to require background checks on all persons buying firearms at gun shows in Minnesota failed to clear its first hurdle Wednesday before a House committee.

The House Crime Victims and Criminal Records panel defeated the proposal 5-3, leaving its future in doubt. But Rep. Michael Paymar, DFL-St. Paul, the bill's author, said he may at some point resurrect the proposal before this year's legislative session ends. "It's not over [at the Legislature] until, you know, the gavel comes down in May," he said.

The legislation, favored by anti-gun groups, aimed to close what supporters said was a legal loophole that allowed persons attending a gun show to sell a gun without requiring the buyer to undergo a background check. While many gun dealers at gun shows are licensed and required to make sure background checks are conducted, many gun sales take place without background checks, Paymar said.

But gun-rights groups said Paymar and others had not been able to show that guns bought at gun shows without background checks were a significant factor in crimes.

Note the comments. especially this gem:

Gun Rights is NOT strictly a party issue

"Any gun owner who votes democrat is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders." I'd like to point out that 2 Democrats on the committee OPPOSED this bill and when the committee chair called for a voice vote and declared motion passed, it was a DEMOCRAT who called "DIVISION" thus prompting a hand count and the chair to reverse and say motion fails. It's not party politics, it's principle.
posted by plblark on Mar. 11, 10 at 10:31 AM

[Don L]

Yup, without that "division" call, it would have passed. Makes one wonder..... The Strib article quotes Paymar as saying he may re-introduce it again this session.