Paymar Bill Dead

[Karl B. Andersen]

Get ready for tomorrow - SF 458 - Latz' bill.

[Glenn_S]

This was posted on the Session Daily site:

The motion was made more than 75 minutes after the committee was scheduled to reconvene, and after Paymar and Rep. Debra Hilstrom (DFL-Brooklyn Center) had been meeting for a few days to try to reach agreement on language both could support.


Each has sponsored differing gun safety bills: Paymar with background checks; Hilstrom without.


“I think we both have compromised a lot,” Paymar said. “We have abandoned universal background checks that I absolutely wanted in this bill, but we were trying to move something forward on gun violence and we agreed that we would keep the language and plug the gun show loophole.” That would require any purchaser of a gun at a show to go through a background check.


That language, likely to come forth as another bill in the next day or two, is expected to be acted upon this week by either the public safety or judiciary committees, which are chaired respectively by Paymar and Hilstrom.


“I think this keeps the discussion going. I think Rep. Hilstrom is as committed and concerned about gun violence as anybody in this Legislature,” Paymar said. “I think we can get this done. It’s a big step; it’s a huge compromise on both of our parts.”


“The goal was to bring people together and see if there was something we could do in the Minnesota House of Representatives,” Hilstrom said. “Ultimately, I think you’ll have a vehicle that will come to the floor and then you’ll see votes on many provisions.”


Rep. Tony Cornish (R-Vernon Center) said the compromised bill will be opposed by Second Amendment backers, such as himself.


“The only way we can put an end to this is to fight it all the way,” he said.

the fight isn't done yet...

[JK-linux]

This was posted on the Session Daily site:

The motion was made more than 75 minutes after the committee was scheduled to reconvene, and after Paymar and Rep. Debra Hilstrom (DFL-Brooklyn Center) had been meeting for a few days to try to reach agreement on language both could support.


Each has sponsored differing gun safety bills: Paymar with background checks; Hilstrom without.


“I think we both have compromised a lot,” Paymar said. “We have abandoned universal background checks that I absolutely wanted in this bill, but we were trying to move something forward on gun violence and we agreed that we would keep the language and plug the gun show loophole.” That would require any purchaser of a gun at a show to go through a background check.


That language, likely to come forth as another bill in the next day or two, is expected to be acted upon this week by either the public safety or judiciary committees, which are chaired respectively by Paymar and Hilstrom.


“I think this keeps the discussion going. I think Rep. Hilstrom is as committed and concerned about gun violence as anybody in this Legislature,” Paymar said. “I think we can get this done. It’s a big step; it’s a huge compromise on both of our parts.”


“The goal was to bring people together and see if there was something we could do in the Minnesota House of Representatives,” Hilstrom said. “Ultimately, I think you’ll have a vehicle that will come to the floor and then you’ll see votes on many provisions.”


Rep. Tony Cornish (R-Vernon Center) said the compromised bill will be opposed by Second Amendment backers, such as himself.


“The only way we can put an end to this is to fight it all the way,” he said.

the fight isn't done yet...

Pretty clever... now that Hilstrom's bill has been referred to by the press (for a while now), not by number, but as "the NRA supported bill" it's going to be tough to get across to the general populace that it will be substantively different. The differences will get lost in the 2 or 3 sixty second news bites most people will see after work before a vote takes place by Friday. Many will wonder why we are being so dang uncompromising and difficult when the DFL is "giving them what they wanted". Dang gun-nuts are never happy and it goes to show you why these gun-nuts just can't be reasoned with!

[JustPlainT]

I'd like to see what bastardization they do to the "NRA supported bill" before I say that things are over.

They could still destroy permit to carry.

They could still try to kill private transfers in some manner.

They could still do God knows what.


We are still fighting today, and we are doing so after having to eject a traitor (Hilstrom).

[darkwolf45]

What specifically makes her a traitor?

[JustPlainT]

What specifically makes her a traitor?

Under political pressure, she switched sides and supported Paymar's bill last night in committee.

[darkwolf45]

I read it as a legislator worked with another legislator to compromise and expected the same of her fellow legislator. And even then, consensus couldnt be made. That doesnt make her a traitor, it just means she is doing her job to the best of her ability.

And one more time- what the hell is with this gun show loophole BS? I was under the impression that if you were a FFL, you had to ensure authorized transfer of a firearm, i.e. you run a background check, the purchaser has a PTP or PTC. If you are regularly making money off selling guns you need to be an FFL. If you are. Ot an FFL and selling youre breaking the law.

Can someone please explain what this f***ing loophole is?

[JustPlainT]

And one more time- what the hell is with this gun show loophole BS? I was under the impression that if you were a FFL, you had to ensure authorized transfer of a firearm, i.e. you run a background check, the purchaser has a PTP or PTC. If you are regularly making money off selling guns you need to be an FFL. If you are. Ot an FFL and selling youre breaking the law.

Can someone please explain what this f***ing loophole is?

There isn't a "gun show loophole." Never was, never has been.

If you are an FFL, you need to do 4473/NICS check/all legal stuff.

If you are a private party (non-FFL), and you're selling a gun you own, you can sell to anyone as long as you have no reason to believe they are prohibited from owning a gun. There's some legalese text in MN state law, but basically you can sell a personal gun without a 4473/background check.

Politicians like to say "gun show loophole" as code for private party transfers (ie, a transaction occurring between two private, non-FFL parties). It's not an actual loophole.

[damian_mb]

I agree, no such thing as a loop hole but I think a non FFL seller should still require a PTC or PTP before the sale like we all would do personally. Basically it is buying off the black market but at a gun show and not in a dark alley.

[Greg]

I agree, no such thing as a loop hole but I think a non FFL seller should still require a PTC or PTP before the sale like we all would do personally. Basically it is buying off the black market but at a gun show and not in a dark alley.

Selling one of my guns to a neighbor or a friend, at a gun show or not, is NOT buying on the black market!

[The Verminator]

We are still fighting today, and we are doing so after having to eject a traitor (Hilstrom).

With people like you attacking our GOOD friends like Hilstrom......we probably WILL lose this.

Think about it.....hard.

[Greg]

Paymer was just on NPR whining about not getting his way and still said he wants the background checks, for everyone, back in the bill. Tony Cornish then called him on it!

We can't trust that lying weasel Paymer until the session is over!

[The Verminator]

What specifically makes her a traitor?

Under political pressure, she switched sides and supported Paymar's bill last night in committee.

Not true. The votes were not there so it was dropped. Paymar himself pronounced it dead.

That bill is dead due to her resistance.

[Greg]

We are still fighting today, and we are doing so after having to eject a traitor (Hilstrom).

With people like you attacking our GOOD friends like Hilstrom......we probably WILL lose this.

Think about it.....hard.

+1

[NZarathustra]

I agree, no such thing as a loop hole but I think a non FFL seller should still require a PTC or PTP before the sale like we all would do personally. Basically it is buying off the black market but at a gun show and not in a dark alley.

I could maybe get behind this, depending on how they define "gun show". But how would they enforce it? I mean, they can only do so many "sting" operations... and, other than checking everyone's PTP/PTC at the door if you're walking out with a firearm (which could be strongly argued as a violation of the 4th Amendment), how are they going to know you're a legal purchaser?

So I guess I would need to see what they define as a "gun show" and what the enforcement remedies are.