HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Firearms related political discussion forum

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby nyffman on Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:07 am

rthib wrote:Since it was in Finance, not much debate.

The main arguments against.

1) MN is the easiest state for felon to get back a gun and this would allow them to shot anyone they want on the sidewalk

2) Minneapolis Police Chief doesn't like it

Notice that Goodwin, who had her undies in a bunch over the NYT article proclaiming that MN was so easy for felons to rearm themselves probably wouldn't be so quick to compare our violent crime rate to that of the states like NY or CA, where it is supposedly so much more difficult. Maybe it's because they want gun control as a way to facilitate people control. Most of convicted violent felons can and do easily arm themselves without going to a gun shop or gun show. Also realize, the anti crowd is going to throw up anything in hopes something sticks. They also know that it will pass the senate and the Governor will veto it.
our quarrel is not about the value of freedom per se, but stems from our opinion of our fellow men … a man’s admiration of absolute government is proportionate to the contempt he feels for those around him --Alexis de Tocqueville--
User avatar
nyffman
 
Posts: 5176 [View]
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:46 am

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby photogpat on Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:16 am

Here's an interesting response to Luo's NYT piece:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xOct_t8hl8
Nothing to see here. Continue swimming.
User avatar
photogpat
 
Posts: 3701 [View]
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 1:01 pm
Location: Securely barricaded

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby Scott Notaeh on Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:28 pm

H.F. No. 1467, 1st Unofficial Engrossment - 87th Legislative Session (2011-2012) Posted on Feb 10, 2012

1.1A bill for an act
1.2relating to firearms; clarifying and delimiting the authority of public officials
1.3to disarm individuals at any time; clarifying law on use of force in defense of
1.4home and person; codifying and extending Minnesota's self-defense and defense
1.5of home laws; eliminating the common law duty to retreat in cases of self
1.6defense outside the home; expanding the boundaries of dwelling for purposes of
1.7self-defense; creating a presumption in the case of a person entering a dwelling
1.8or occupied vehicle by stealth or force; extending the rights available to a person
1.9in that person's dwelling to a person defending against entry of that person's
1.10occupied vehicle; providing for the recognition by Minnesota of other states'
1.11permits to carry a pistol within and under the laws of Minnesota;amending
1.12Minnesota Statutes 2010, sections 609.065; 624.7131, subdivisions 2, 8; 624.714,
1.13subdivision 16; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 624.
1.14BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

1.15ARTICLE 1
1.16PERMIT TO PURCHASE RENEWAL

1.17 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 624.7131, subdivision 2, is amended to
1.18read:
1.19 Subd. 2. Investigation. The chief of police or sheriff shall check criminal histories,
1.20records and warrant information relating to the applicant through the Minnesota Crime
1.21Information System, the national criminal record repository, and the National Instant
1.22Criminal Background Check System. The chief of police or sheriff shall may also make a
1.23reasonable effort to check other available state and local record-keeping systems. The
1.24chief of police or sheriff shall obtain commitment information from the commissioner of
1.25human services as provided in section 245.041.
1.26EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective August 1, 2012, for all valid
1.27transferee permits issued by the chief of police or sheriff on or after August 1, 2011.

2.1 Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 624.7131, subdivision 8, is amended to read:
2.2 Subd. 8. Hearing upon denial Petition for relief. Any person aggrieved by a
2.3violation of this section or by denial of a transferee permit may appeal the denial petition
2.4for relief to the district court having jurisdiction over the county or municipality in which
2.5the denial act occurred. The court shall grant an appeal if the applicant is not a person
2.6prohibited from possessing a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon by
2.7section 624.713. If the court grants relief under this subdivision, the court may award the
2.8petitioner reasonable costs and expenses including attorney fees.
2.9EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective August 1, 2012, and applies to
2.10appeals brought on or after that date.

2.11ARTICLE 2
2.12AUTHORITY TO SEIZE WEAPONS

2.13 Section 1. [624.7192] AUTHORITY TO SEIZE AND CONFISCATE FIREARMS.
2.14 (a) This section applies only during the effective period of a state of emergency
2.15proclaimed by the governor relating to a public disorder or disaster.
2.16(b) A peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's official duties
2.17without a warrant may disarm a lawfully detained individual only temporarily and only if
2.18the officer reasonably believes it is immediately necessary for the protection of the officer
2.19or another individual. Before releasing the individual, the peace officer must return to the
2.20individual any seized firearms and ammunition, and components thereof, any firearms
2.21accessories and ammunition reloading equipment and supplies, and any other personal
2.22weapons taken from the individual, unless the officer: (1) takes the individual into
2.23physical custody for engaging in criminal activity or for observation pursuant to section
2.24253B.05, subdivision 2; or (2) seizes the items as evidence pursuant to an investigation for
2.25the commission of the crime for which the individual was arrested.
2.26(c) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, no governmental unit, government
2.27official, government employee, peace officer, or other person or body acting under
2.28governmental authority or color of law may undertake any of the following actions with
2.29regard to any firearms and ammunition, and components thereof; any firearms accessories
2.30and ammunition reloading equipment and supplies; and any other personal weapons:
2.31(1) prohibit, regulate, or curtail the otherwise lawful possession, carrying,
2.32transportation, transfer, defensive use, or other lawful use of any of these items;
2.33(2) seize, commandeer, or confiscate any of these items in any manner, except as
2.34expressly authorized in paragraph (b);
3.1(3) suspend or revoke a valid permit issued pursuant to section 624.7131 or 624.714,
3.2except as expressly authorized in those sections; or
3.3(4) close or limit the operating hours of businesses that lawfully sell or service any
3.4of these items, unless such closing or limitation of hours applies equally to all forms
3.5of commerce.
3.6(d) No provision of law relating to a public disorder or disaster emergency
3.7proclamation by the governor or any other governmental or quasi-governmental official,
3.8including but not limited to emergency management powers pursuant to chapters 9
3.9and 12, shall be construed as authorizing the governor or any other governmental or
3.10quasi-governmental official of this state or any of its political subdivisions acting at
3.11the direction of the governor or another official to act in violation of this paragraph
3.12or paragraphs (b) and (c).
3.13(e)(1) An individual aggrieved by a violation of this section may seek relief in an
3.14action at law or in equity or in any other proper proceeding for damages, injunctive relief,
3.15or other appropriate redress against a person who commits or causes the commission of
3.16this violation. Venue shall be in the district court having jurisdiction over the county in
3.17which the aggrieved individual resides or in which the violation occurred.
3.18(2) In addition to any other remedy available at law or in equity, an individual
3.19aggrieved by the seizure or confiscation of an item listed in paragraph (c) in violation of
3.20this section may make application for the immediate return of the items in the office of the
3.21clerk of court for the county in which the items were seized and, except as provided in
3.22paragraph (b), the court shall order the immediate return of the items by the seizing or
3.23confiscating governmental office and that office's employed officials.
3.24(3) In an action or proceeding to enforce this section, the court may award the
3.25prevailing plaintiff reasonable court costs and expenses, including attorney fees.
3.26EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective August 1, 2012.

3.27ARTICLE 3
3.28SELF-DEFENSE: USE OF FORCE

3.29 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 609.065, is amended to read:
3.30609.065 JUSTIFIABLE TAKING OF LIFE USE OF DEADLY FORCE IN
3.31DEFENSE OF HOME AND PERSON.
3.32 Subdivision 1. Definitions. The intentional taking of the life of another is not
3.33authorized by section 609.06, except when necessary in resisting or preventing an offense
3.34which the actor reasonably believes exposes the actor or another to great bodily harm or
4.1death, or preventing the commission of a felony in the actor's place of abode. (a) For
4.2purposes of this section, the terms in this subdivision have the meanings given them.
4.3(b) "Court order" means an order for protection issued under section 518B.01, a
4.4restraining order issued under section 609.748, a no contact order issued under section
4.5518B.01 or 629.75, or a substantively similar order issued by any court in this state,
4.6another state, the United States, or any subordinate jurisdiction of the United States.
4.7(c) "Deadly force" means force used by an individual with the purpose of causing,
4.8or which the individual should reasonably know creates a substantial risk of causing,
4.9great bodily harm or death. The intentional discharge of a firearm by an individual at
4.10another person, or at a vehicle in which another person is believed to be, constitutes
4.11deadly force. A threat to cause great bodily harm or death, by the production of a weapon
4.12or otherwise, constitutes reasonable force and not deadly force, when the individual's
4.13objective is limited to creating an expectation that the individual will use deadly force
4.14only if authorized by law.
4.15(d) "Dwelling" means a building defined under section 609.556, subdivision 3, an
4.16overnight stopping accommodation of any kind, or a place of abode, that an individual
4.17temporarily or permanently is occupying or intending to occupy as a habitation or home.
4.18A dwelling includes, but is not limited to, a building or conveyance and that building's
4.19or conveyance's curtilage and any attached or adjacent deck, porch, appurtenance, or
4.20other structure, whether the building or conveyance is used temporarily or permanently
4.21for these purposes, is mobile or immobile, or is a motor vehicle, watercraft, motor home,
4.22tent, or the equivalent.
4.23(e) "Forcible felony" means any crime punishable by imprisonment exceeding one
4.24year the elements of which include the use or threatened use of physical force or a deadly
4.25weapon against the person of another, including but not limited to: murder in the first and
4.26second degrees; manslaughter in the first degree; assault in the first, second, and third
4.27degrees; criminal sexual conduct in the first and second degrees; arson in the first degree;
4.28burglary in the first, second, and third degrees; robbery; and kidnapping.
4.29 (f) "Good faith" includes honesty in fact in the conduct of the act concerned.
4.30(g) "Great bodily harm" has the meaning given in section 609.02, subdivision 7a.
4.31 (h) "Imminent" means the actor infers from all the facts and circumstances that the
4.32course of conduct has commenced.
4.33(i) "Substantial bodily harm" has the meaning given in section 609.02, subdivision 8.
4.34(j) "Vehicle" means a conveyance of any type.
4.35 Subd. 2. Circumstances when authorized. (a) The use of deadly force by an
4.36individual is justified under this section when the act is undertaken:
5.1(1) to resist or prevent the commission of a felony in the individual's dwelling;
5.2(2) to resist or prevent what the individual reasonably believes is an offense or
5.3attempted offense that imminently exposes the individual or another person to substantial
5.4bodily harm, great bodily harm, or death; or
5.5(3) to resist or prevent what the individual reasonably believes is the commission or
5.6imminent commission of a forcible felony.
5.7(b) The use of deadly force is not authorized under this section if the individual
5.8knows that the person against whom force is being used is a licensed peace officer from
5.9this state, another state, the United States, or any subordinate jurisdiction of the United
5.10States, who is acting lawfully.
5.11 Subd. 3. Degree of force; retreat. An individual taking defensive action pursuant
5.12to subdivision 2 may use all force and means, including deadly force, that the individual
5.13in good faith believes is required to succeed in defense. The individual may meet force
5.14with superior force when the individual's objective is defensive; the individual is not
5.15required to retreat; and the individual may continue defensive actions against an assailant
5.16until the danger has ended.
5.17 Subd. 4. Presumptions. (a) An individual using deadly force is presumed to possess
5.18a reasonable belief that there exists an imminent threat of substantial bodily harm, great
5.19bodily harm, or death to the individual or another person, if the individual knows or
5.20has reason to know that:
5.21(1) the person against whom the defensive action is being taken is unlawfully
5.22entering or attempting to enter by force or by stealth, or has unlawfully entered by force or
5.23by stealth and remains within, the dwelling or occupied vehicle of the individual; or
5.24(2) the person against whom the defensive action is being taken is in the process of
5.25removing, or attempting to remove, the individual or another person from the dwelling or
5.26occupied vehicle of the individual.
5.27(b) An individual is not entitled to the benefit of the presumption in paragraph (a) if
5.28the individual knows that the person against whom the defensive action is being taken:
5.29(1) is a lawful resident of the dwelling or a lawful possessor of the vehicle, or is
5.30otherwise lawfully permitted to enter the dwelling or vehicle; or
5.31(2) is a person who has lawful custody of the person being removed from the
5.32dwelling or vehicle or whose removal from the dwelling or vehicle is being attempted.
5.33A person who is prohibited by a court order from contacting another individual or
5.34from entering a dwelling or possessing a vehicle of another individual is not a lawful
5.35resident of that individual's dwelling and is not a lawful possessor of that individual's
5.36vehicle.
6.1 (c) An individual using defensive force is not entitled to the benefit of the
6.2presumption in paragraph (a) if the individual is presently engaged in a crime or attempting
6.3to escape from the scene of a crime, or is presently using the dwelling or occupied vehicle
6.4in furtherance of a crime.
6.5 Subd. 5. Criminal investigation; immunity from prosecution. (a) An individual
6.6who uses force, including deadly force, according to this section or as otherwise provided
6.7by law in defense of the individual, the individual's dwelling, or another individual is
6.8justified in using such force and is immune from any criminal prosecution for that act.
6.9(b) A law enforcement agency may arrest an individual using force under
6.10circumstances described in this section only after considering any claims or circumstances
6.11supporting self-defense or lawful defense of another individual.
6.12 Subd. 6. Justifiable use of force; burden of proof. In a criminal trial, when there
6.13is any evidence of justifiable use of force under this section or section 609.06, the state
6.14has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's actions were
6.15not justifiable.
6.16 Subd. 7. Short title. This section may be cited as the "Defense of Dwelling and
6.17Person Act of 2012."
6.18EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective August 1, 2012, and applies to uses
6.19of deadly force occurring on or after that date.

6.20ARTICLE 4
6.21RECOGNITION OF OTHER STATES' PERMITS TO CARRY

6.22 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 624.714, subdivision 16, is amended to
6.23read:
6.24 Subd. 16. Recognition of permits from other states. (a) The commissioner must
6.25annually establish and publish a list of other states that have laws governing the issuance
6.26of permits to carry weapons that are not substantially similar to this section. The list must
6.27be available on the Internet. A person holding a valid carry permit from a or license issued
6.28by another state not on the list or other non-Minnesota governmental jurisdiction may use
6.29the license or permit or license in this state Minnesota subject to the rights, privileges,
6.30and requirements of this section. This permit or license is a valid permit to carry a pistol
6.31within and under the laws of Minnesota for as long as that permit or license remains valid
6.32under the laws of the issuing jurisdiction, and is deemed to be a permit issued under this
6.33section for all purposes.
7.1(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), no license or permit from or license issued by
7.2another state or other non-Minnesota governmental jurisdiction is valid in this state if the
7.3holder is or becomes prohibited by Minnesota law from possessing a firearm.
7.4(c) Any sheriff, on the sheriff's initiative or at the request of a police chief of a
7.5jurisdiction located in the same county, may file a petition under subdivision 12 seeking
7.6an order suspending or revoking the authority of the holder of an out-of-state permit
7.7holder's authority or license to carry a pistol in this state Minnesota on the grounds set
7.8forth in subdivision 6, paragraph (a), clause (3). An order shall only be issued only if the
7.9petitioner meets the burden of proof and criteria set forth in subdivision 12. If the court
7.10denies the petition, the court must award the permit or license holder reasonable costs and
7.11expenses including attorney fees. The petition may be filed in any Minnesota county in
7.12the state where a person holding a license or permit from or license issued by another state
7.13or other non-Minnesota governmental jurisdiction can be found.
7.14(d) The commissioner must annually establish and publish a list of states that have
7.15reciprocity agreements with Minnesota mutually recognizing each state's permits or
7.16licenses to carry a pistol, or that otherwise recognize Minnesota permits to carry a pistol.
7.17The list must be available on the Internet.
7.18(e) The commissioner must, when necessary, execute reciprocity agreements
7.19regarding carry permits or licenses with jurisdictions whose carry permits or licenses are
7.20recognized under paragraph (a).
7.21(f) Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this subdivision, a Minnesota resident
7.22is not authorized to carry a pistol in Minnesota under the terms of a carry permit or license
7.23issued by another state or non-Minnesota government jurisdiction.
7.24EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective August 1, 2012.
User avatar
Scott Notaeh
 
Posts: 747 [View]
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:06 pm
Location: Ham Lake

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby nyffman on Fri Feb 10, 2012 10:14 pm

7.21(f) Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this subdivision, a Minnesota resident
7.22is not authorized to carry a pistol in Minnesota under the terms of a carry permit or license
7.23issued by another state or non-Minnesota government jurisdiction.


Did I miss something earlier? I have never heard of this one.
our quarrel is not about the value of freedom per se, but stems from our opinion of our fellow men … a man’s admiration of absolute government is proportionate to the contempt he feels for those around him --Alexis de Tocqueville--
User avatar
nyffman
 
Posts: 5176 [View]
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:46 am

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby Scott Notaeh on Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:08 am

nyffman wrote:
7.21(f) Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this subdivision, a Minnesota resident
7.22is not authorized to carry a pistol in Minnesota under the terms of a carry permit or license
7.23issued by another state or non-Minnesota government jurisdiction.


Did I miss something earlier? I have never heard of this one.


Sounds like it makes MN residents get the MN permit so a Utah permit won't work for MN residents. I think I remember it being in the bill last year too.
User avatar
Scott Notaeh
 
Posts: 747 [View]
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:06 pm
Location: Ham Lake

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby nyffman on Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:05 pm

I'm just surprised no one has at least mentioned this. It probably won't affect the vast majority, but I do know of some who claim top be carrying on UT or FL who would be affected.
our quarrel is not about the value of freedom per se, but stems from our opinion of our fellow men … a man’s admiration of absolute government is proportionate to the contempt he feels for those around him --Alexis de Tocqueville--
User avatar
nyffman
 
Posts: 5176 [View]
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:46 am

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby ex-LT on Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:34 pm

Scott Notaeh wrote:
nyffman wrote:
7.21(f) Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this subdivision, a Minnesota resident
7.22is not authorized to carry a pistol in Minnesota under the terms of a carry permit or license
7.23issued by another state or non-Minnesota government jurisdiction.


Did I miss something earlier? I have never heard of this one.


Sounds like it makes MN residents get the MN permit so a Utah permit won't work for MN residents. I think I remember it being in the bill last year too.

I seem to recall either Heather or Joan squawking last year about MN citizens who didn't qualify for a MN permit circumventing the process by getting a permit from another state and legally carrying on the out-of-state permit, so I think this is probably something new.

I wouldn't put it past whoever drafted the bill to have put that in there just to disarm one of Heather's arguments against the bill. As it is, I would guess that it probably affects less than 1% of permit holders.
DNR Certified Firearms Safety Instructor
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Instructor - Pistol, Rifle, and Shotgun
NRA Endowment Life Member
MN Gun Owners Caucus Life Member
Member Post 435 Gun Club
User avatar
ex-LT
Inspector Gadget
 
Posts: 3472 [View]
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 1:49 pm
Location: Lakeville

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby ninjaplease! on Sun Feb 12, 2012 6:59 am

[quote="nyffman"]I'm just surprised no one has at least mentioned this. It probably won't affect the vast majority, but I do know of some who claim top be carrying on UT or FL who would be affected.[/quote]

I thought in order to have a Utah permit you had to have a valid permit in your state of residence.
I don't carry a gun to look for or start a fight. I carry one to finish a fight I never wanted to be in.
ninjaplease!
 
Posts: 27 [View]
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 4:25 am

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby photogpat on Sun Feb 12, 2012 7:13 am

ninjaplease! wrote:I thought in order to have a Utah permit you had to have a valid permit in your state of residence.


Thats the case now, hasn't always been that way. A non-resident of Utah (MN resident) used to be able to get a Utah NR permit w/o having a MN one first. UT tightened that up recently.
Nothing to see here. Continue swimming.
User avatar
photogpat
 
Posts: 3701 [View]
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 1:01 pm
Location: Securely barricaded

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby 2in2out on Tue Feb 14, 2012 5:14 pm

I e-mailed a bunch of people at the state, and received a personal reply from Senator Mike Parry. He said he was a co-author of HF 1467.
"...the liberties of the American people were dependent upon the ballot-box, the jury-box, and the cartridge-box; that without these no class of people could live and flourish in this country..." ---Frederick Douglass
User avatar
2in2out
 
Posts: 1014 [View]
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:19 am
Location: SE MN

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby tizzo on Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:07 pm

2in2out wrote:I e-mailed a bunch of people at the state, and received a personal reply from Senator Mike Parry. He said he was a co-author of HF 1467.


Ditto, stump email but still nice.
Kyle
---------
Tam Recording
User avatar
tizzo
 
Posts: 474 [View]
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 3:05 pm
Location: Prior Lake

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby Thunder71 on Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:51 pm

tizzo wrote:
2in2out wrote:I e-mailed a bunch of people at the state, and received a personal reply from Senator Mike Parry. He said he was a co-author of HF 1467.


Ditto, stump email but still nice.


Yep, me too... dang, thought I was special like my mom always told me I was.

Oh well.
User avatar
Thunder71
 
Posts: 3096 [View]
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:43 pm
Location: SE

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby photogpat on Wed Feb 15, 2012 6:40 am

Backstrom has been heard from (big surprise):

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/comm ... 27433.html

A state bill for the trigger-happy? Bulls-eye.
<snip>
Such a law would, in essence, allow people to shoot first and ask questions later...
<snip>
Do we really want to authorize the use of deadly force in response to a push, punch or verbal threat without any inquiry as to whether a reasonable person would have done so under the circumstances?



Mr. Backstrom, I can show examples of a "shove" or "punch" that has resulted in great bodily harm and/or death.

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/119947399.html
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/11/26/State ... or_d.shtml

P.S. Anyone playing anti-gun buzzword bingo "Shoot First Ask Questions Later", and "Trigger Happy" should be marked off on your cards.
Nothing to see here. Continue swimming.
User avatar
photogpat
 
Posts: 3701 [View]
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 1:01 pm
Location: Securely barricaded

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby Heffay on Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:43 am

photogpat wrote:Backstrom has been heard from (big surprise):

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/comm ... 27433.html

A state bill for the trigger-happy? Bulls-eye.
<snip>
Such a law would, in essence, allow people to shoot first and ask questions later...
<snip>
Do we really want to authorize the use of deadly force in response to a push, punch or verbal threat without any inquiry as to whether a reasonable person would have done so under the circumstances?



Mr. Backstrom, I can show examples of a "shove" or "punch" that has resulted in great bodily harm and/or death.

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/119947399.html
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/11/26/State ... or_d.shtml

P.S. Anyone playing anti-gun buzzword bingo "Shoot First Ask Questions Later", and "Trigger Happy" should be marked off on your cards.


Yeah, that article was full of /eyeroll. At it seems like the comments reflect the change in attitudes towards guns. 20 years ago it would have been the opposite, but the gun control people burned all their credibility with the "blood in the streets" defense.
To the two forum members who have used lines from my posts as their signatures, can't you quote Jesse Ventura or some other great Minnesotan instead of stealing mine? - LePetomane
User avatar
Heffay
 
Posts: 8842 [View]
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:39 am

Re: HF 1467 Back to the MN Senate Committee

Postby photogpat on Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:20 am

Joan's burning her's up on Twitter trying to keep warm:

japete_standground_tweet_2_15_2012.jpg


japete_standground_tweet2_2_15_2012.jpg


Someone remember that 2nd one in 5 years...
Nothing to see here. Continue swimming.
User avatar
photogpat
 
Posts: 3701 [View]
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 1:01 pm
Location: Securely barricaded

PreviousNext

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron