Capitol Hearings Thursday 3/20

[photogpat]

GOCRA.ORG

After the humiliating defeat of every bit of gun control proposed last session, you'd think that the gun grabbers would learn.

Unfortunately, you'd be wrong.

We need you to make your voice heard at the State Capitol, this Thursday.



Are you coming to the Capitol on Thursday? Help us out and let us know by clicking here: I'm coming!
On Thursday, a Senate committee will hear two bills -- six hours apart -- that would infringe on the rights of Minnesota gun owners.

Gun Confiscation Court Orders

Civil rights opponent Ron Latz, chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, introduced SF2639, a bill that would create de facto confiscation of firearms from persons accused of domestic violence. THE BILL WILL BE HEARD THURSDAY EVENING, March 20, at 6 p.m. in Room 15 of the Capitol.

While GOCRA has no love for wife-beaters, this bill goes far beyond protecting victims, and would impose a back-door theft of personal property through exorbitant fees.

Capitol Carry Traps

Based on the flawed recommendations of lame duck Lieutenant Governor Prettner Solon's capitol safety advisory committee, and steamrolled by lame duck Representative Michael Paymar, SF2690 would impose additional red tape hoops to jump through, and "gotcha" felonies for permit holders visiting the State Capitol Complex. THE BILL WILL BE HEARD THURSDAY, March 20, at noon in Room 15 of the Capitol.

Bad information leads to bad policy, and the information presented by the Department of Public Safety at those committee meetings this summer was terrible: the DPS spokesman had no idea that the DPS managed the permit holder database!

This bill would create a trap for harmless permit holders whose meaningless, duplicative, unused notifications "expired." A visit to any capitol-area building -- even the Minnesota History Center -- after this false "expiration" would turn a permit holder into a felon.
Disturbingly, SF2690 was introduced by A-rated Senator David Tomassoni. We believe, at this point, that he was handed the bill by his caucus leadership, and doesn't fully understand its meaninglessness to public safety, nor its the legal trap it would create for law-abiding permit holders.

Between now and the hearings, we'll be gathering support at the Capitol to challenge these bills -- either by changing them to respect our rights, or killing them outright.

We need you there to remind your representatives who they work for!

Are you coming to the Capitol on Thursday? Help us out and let us know by clicking here: I'm coming!


Thank you for your support!




Please ask gun owners and civil rights supporters to sign up for these alerts at http://www.gocra.org/join.html

Donate - Twitter - Facebook

GOCRA - P. O. Box 131254 - St. Paul, MN 55113
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All content (C) 2014 GOCRA. Redistribution is encouraged, but must include the
complete text above and including this section.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Stugotz]

Copied, pasted, and emailed to appropriately like-minded constituency.

[photogpat]

Copy it far and wide. Even if you never plan to carry at the Capitol - its Latz! That and the other provisions in the DV bill create a huge bill w/o due process of law -- ridiculous!

Maroon shirts of the world - UNITE!

EDIT: The anti-gunners at "Protect" MN have scheduled a "rally" for Thursday at the Capitol as well -- no doubt to try and pack the seats at the hearings with their own supporters. They'll be busing in the retirees and school kids again. We need to show them how many more of us there are.

[gunsmith]

Civil rights opponent Ron Latz, chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, introduced SF2639, a bill that would create de facto confiscation of firearms from persons accused of domestic violence.

Congratulations on framing the issue properly...Civil rights opponent.

You many consider using the phrase "Civil Rights Obstructionist" as well...has more of a Racist White Cracker tint to it.

[photogpat]

Civil rights opponent Ron Latz, chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, introduced SF2639, a bill that would create de facto confiscation of firearms from persons accused of domestic violence.

Congratulations on framing the issue properly...Civil rights opponent.

You many consider using the phrase "Civil Rights Obstructionist" as well...has more of a Racist White Cracker tint to it.

I can't claim credit for having written that...

[Sietch]

I'm taking off work and class and will be there. That's one advantage the other side has, I believe; people of their political persuasion are many times more likely to be available on a weekday, whereas our people are usually working/studying our butts off.

Don't let the orcs pack the room!

[jshuberg]

I'll be there as well. A vacation day well spent.

[gunsmith]

Will there be streaming?

[jshuberg]

Probably. Check the links below on Thurs to locate the stream:
http://www.senate.mn/media/
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/htv/htv.asp

Please contact the following members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and let them know that SF2639 and SF2690 are unconstitutional infringements on your right to own and carry firearms:

http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us/membe ... d=1102&ls=
http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us/membe ... d=1185&ls=
http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us/membe ... d=1193&ls=
sen.warren.limmer@senate.mn
sen.bobby.champion@senate.mn
sen.dan.hall@senate.mn
sen.scott.newman@senate.mn
sen.kathy.sheran@senate.mn

[jshuberg]

My letter to the committee members:
---

It has come to my attention that you will be hearing two firearms related bills in the Senate Judiciary Committee on 3/20/2014. Below are my opinions on these two bills, please give them the appropriate consideration.

SF2690:

This bill serves no purpose other than to increase the burden on law abiding permit holders who wish to visit the capitol. The carrying of a pistol at the capitol is currently lawful, provided that the individual has a current and valid carry permit, and has notified the commissioner of public safety that they intend to do so. No extra permission needs to be granted - as long as notification is given the permit holder can lawfully carry a pistol at the capitol.

This requirement for notification is simply redundant to the permitting process. It serves no purpose simply that having a permit doesn't already serve. Rather than simplify the process for law abiding permit holders to exercise their fundamental human rights, SF2690 seeks to further burden law abiding permit holders who wish to visit the capitol by introducing an expiration to their notification letter. This additional burden serves no purpose other than to harass and burden permit holders with additional and unnecessary process.

SF2639:

While I understand the purpose of 2639, the implementation of this bill is a violation of the 2nd, 5th and 14th Amendments to the US constitution. A person cannot be deprived of his/her constitutional rights without due process of law. SF2639 would result in an individual becoming a prohibited person concerning firearms rights without due process of law. Should SF2639 pass into law, it would be challenged on it's constitutionality, and it would most definitely be struck down by the court. Not only would this law, and all members of the legislature who vote for it be guilty of depriving people of their constitutional rights, they would also be guilty of wasting taxpayer dollars for any court costs incurred defending such an obvious constitutional violation. This simply cannot be tolerated.

The second thing I find wrong with SF2639 is that if a person does become a prohibited person, he should be allowed to sell or gift his firearms to anyone of his choosing who is legally allowed to accept them. There is absolutely no reason that an individual would have to surrender their firearms to law enforcement or to an FFL willing to store his firearms. If a prohibited person wishes to sell, gift, or otherwise lawfully transfer their firearms to an individual of their choosing, they should be able to do so under existing law. To limit to whom an individual can transfer their firearms is a violation of their property rights, and potentially an unlawful taking of property by the state without financial compensation.


I hope that you will agree that SF2690 and SF2639 are fundamentally flawed bills that simply cannot be allowed to become law. I thank you for your time and consideration, and look forward to the public hearings to be held this Thursday.

[Stugotz]

I'm out of town on business and wasn't going to be back until late Thursday, I may just cancel my appointments that day in order to attend this. (Maybe a good idea to get there early for a good seat!)

[MJY65]

Are any pro gun bills being introduced this session, or is this a better time to just wait it out and hope for a more favorable legislature/governor next session?

[BBeckwith]

Pro gun bills will be hard to start. Don't expect stand your ground, silencers, or reciprocity popping up. I take that back there is one NoDak reciprocity bill floating out there. That maybe about it.

[Don L]

I'll be there for the 12:00 one.

[gunsmith]

Visualize for a second the Republicans taking the Federal Senate by a comfortable margin in November.

The Sky over the Minnesota Legislature would be a different color....and possibly we would have passed the high water mark for the DFL dominance. ???

This "one party rule" stuff Sucks Weiner Big time.

The National Talking heads are describing Franken as a 'sitting duck' Lets hope we can start paying his generous retirement benefits very soon.