Silencer bill next session?

[Ranb]

Has any progress been made on introducing a bill to legalize silencer possession/use for civilians in MN? Last I heard Senator Cornish was not completely opposed to the idea of easing restrictions Thanks.

Ranb

[Mn01r6]

You mean next session where the democrats will still control both houses and the governors office? Where the chairman of the committee it would need to go through wouldn't even allow a true common sense bill to reduce guns being obtained illegally to be heard because he wanted to push his radical anti-gun policies? Where we were lucky to survive without an assault weapons ban and magazine neutering?

Start donating to GOCRA and we might have a chance in 2015 after the elections. Link is in my sig.

/obligatory "it's a suppressor not a silencer" mention.

[Heffay]

It's going to be a very long time before any gun rights legislation gets passed.

[Ranb]

I figured with the passage of 1816 things might have lossened up a bit. Is anyone working on a new bill for the rest of the MN gun owenrs?

Ranb

[LastManArms]

I recently had the opportunity to shoot a suppressed .22 LR handgun in a suppressor friendly state out West. It makes me wish we had that right here in MN even more now. It is a ton of fun. No hearing protection required and it doesn't bother the neighbors.
I'd love to see progress on this. Even if it's just introducing it knowing it won't pass, but getting the topic out there for debate can't hurt? It's ridiculous that they are not allowed. We all know that though... Just like the carry topic. Sigh.

[MrDig]

Never happen while Governor Goof Ball has veto power.

[bstrawse]

Has any progress been made on introducing a bill to legalize silencer possession/use for civilians in MN? Last I heard Senator Cornish was not completely opposed to the idea of easing restrictions Thanks.

Ranb

Unless party control changes, I do not think this will would even get a hearing in either the House or the Senate in the current legislative term..

Bryan

[Thunder71]

So you just flat out don't try because you don't think it'll pass?

Sounds like another year of playing defense to me.

[bstrawse]

So you just flat out don't try because you don't think it'll pass?

Sounds like another year of playing defense to me.

I don't make these decisions so this is just my opinion.

If you have X amount of political capital, how much are you willing to spend on a bill that has no chance of even getting a committee hearing in the MN House or Senate - versus building bi-partisan support for a bill that could easily pass both - and is palatable enough that the governor could sign it?

Unfortunately, those are questions I think we have to ask ourselves -- the stage is not well positioned for us to gain much in 2014.

Again, that's my view.
b

[Thunder71]

I guess what I'm getting at is, why not go for the bill that passed and got vetoed? We know it had bi-partisan support, would he really veto it twice, if it made it all the way again? I would think it would show it was a serious bill and one that is desired in this state and not something he can just write off.

[connsolo]

No chance. Why waste your energy? You'll need it to defend against the next round of gun grabs. Also, taking a hint from the whole ban gay marriage thing, the dems could use it as a rallying cry.

[bstrawse]

I guess what I'm getting at is, why not go for the bill that passed and got vetoed? We know it had bi-partisan support, would he really veto it twice, if it made it all the way again? I would think it would show it was a serious bill and one that is desired in this state and not something he can just write off.

Are you referring to the Stand your Ground bill? the one that the governor vetoed in the previous session?

b

[Thunder71]

Sorry, yes that's the one... there were a lot of good things in that bill, enough so that both sides agreed on it.

[bstrawse]

Sorry, yes that's the one... there were a lot of good things in that bill, enough so that both sides agreed on it.

Got it.

That bill was passed when the Republicans had control of both the house and senate. It enjoyed good bi-partisan support and was vetoed by the governor.

Now the DFL has control of both houses with anti-gun chairman in both the House Public Safety Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee. I think it's unlikely such a bill would get out of committee - even if the Chairs scheduled it for a hearing.

Plus, from a political perspective, in this state I think the stand your ground bill would entail a major fight due to the Martin/Zimmerman situation....

But that's my viewpoint, others may have insight as well.
b

[Thunder71]

Gotcha... No wonder they are going balls to the wall to get "something" passed.