At least he responded.

[Thunder71]

Thought this should be shared, I have respect for him in that he at least responded with a personal reply, more than I can say for anyone else that opposed this bill. I sent a kind response thanking him even though we don't agree on this issue.


Thank you for your note about House File 1467. The "shoot first, ask questions later" bill is simply a bad idea, and I voted against it when it was considered on the Senate floor.

Minnesota already has effective laws protecting the right of self-defense. These laws allow for homeowners to protect themselves and their families in their homes, as well as protect themselves from threats of serious bodily harm in other places. The bill's proposed changes would only serve to escalate violence and increase risk of injury to innocent bystanders. No doubt numerous unnecessary tragedies will result if this bill is enacted into law.

There were many other problems with the bill, including drastic changes to the state's misnamed "conceal and carry" law (concealment is not actually required). Receiving a permit to carry a gun in Minnesota requires an extra set of background checks which consider important factors, such as mental health and criminal history. The "shoot first" law would greatly weaken these common sense protections. If someone already has a permit from another state, even a state with nowhere near the level of safety precautions our citizens have come to expect, they would be automatically allowed to carry a gun in Minnesota.

Governor Mark Dayton vetoed the bill, citing the opposition of virtually every police department and public safety agency in the state to it. I anticipate that his veto will be sustained.

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts on this issue and I look forward to hearing from you in the future.

Very truly yours, Scott Dibble

Sent using Tapatalk on Android

[Pezhead]

It was nice he actually took the time to respond, and I give him credit for that.
It's also of interest he actually knew it isn't required to conceal.

[Spike]

Looks like a form letter. Does that count as a personal reply?

[Thunder71]

More than I can say for anyone else.

Sent using Tapatalk on Android

[topline89]

Unfortunatly, did you think for a minute that that commy left wing loon would have signed that bill Ha!, And to hide behind the statement that law enforcement officers were a big push behind his veto, that is utterly Bullsh--! Most of the cops I have spoken with were in favor of this bill. The only ones jumping on the Dayton band wagon were the political desk jockeys in law enforcement. its once again a bunch of hogwash. There was nothing wrong wlth that bill, and actually gave some sense of rights to the defender rather than the intruder/criminal, not to mention resiprocity with other states. Its high time we all wake up and see that if its up to the left all of our guns would be gone, as well as our 2nd ammendment rights. Funny how the congress, senate commitee, as well as the senate passed it with flying colors all to be naxed by on cornball..leftie amazing..

[justaguy]

The "Very truly yours" is what does it for me.

[ijosef]

No doubt numerous unnecessary tragedies will result if this bill is enacted into law.

Seriously? Numerous tragedies will result... didn't the opposition say the same thing about PTC?