Letter and response from Representative about suppressors

[greenfarmer]

Ok, so today I sat down and wrote a letter to my representative about suppressors, and I just received an email from him... I thought I would share this.

Hi Chad
When I was 1st elected I was a coauthor of a bill to legalize suppressors. I voted for the bill in committee and on the house floor. Former state rep Mike Benson was the author of the bill.
Unfortunately Governor Dayton opposed the bill and it failed. The GOP had control of both the house and senate. Today the GOP only has the house so the chance of legalizing suppressors is slim. I will forward your suggestion to the Chair of public safety who supported the bill in the past. He is the GOP lead on all gun issues. I would be willing to again support the bill.
Glenn

> On Jan 6, 2015, at 4:16 PM, "<sno700@yahoo.com>" <sno700@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Mr Gruenhagen,
>
> I thought I would take a couple of minutes to bring this up to you. Over the past couple of years, we have been pushed on and pushed on about taking our second amendment rights away, and having further laws imposed on us about guns. Well, I, for one would like to push back this year, and try to get some laws opened up. I would really love to see a law pushed to legalize suppressors in our state. Currently, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Michigan, and Wisconsin all have suppressor ownership legal by citizens of their states. This is just a small list of neighboring states which allow them. Suppressors are a way of saving our hearing. Whether that be at an indoor gun range, or an outdoor range like a local sportsmans club, the suppressor will dramatically reduce the sound of the gun, and in turn reduce hearing loss in the future.
>
> I do know that the DNR has had issues with legalizing suppressors in the past. But I don't agree with that. You have to get a tax stamp, and pass a background check, just like you would for buying a gun. And there are laws in place to protect people from using them for poaching. Thus using a suppressor in the commission of a crime, like poaching or reckless discharge within certain city limits, leads to serving FEDERAL TIME. Which, if your going to apply for the tax stamp, and also pass a background check to own one, then your not going to have any sort of ill intentions with it.
>
> To me, owning a suppressor isn't as much of a gun rights issue as it is more of a Health and Safety issue. Decreasing the sound from the gun when at a range, will be better for our ears in the future.
>
> Thanks for your time,

[Northwoods_Jack]

His approach is interesting to me.

So, can I say that anyone opposed to suppressors is anti-health?

I have a step-daughter that goes to the range with me, so, we need to protect her hearing! We have to protect the kids!

[Andrew Rothman]

There will be a suppressor bill this year, and GOCRA will be throwing our full weight behind getting it passed. We have a bill drafted, and we're finalizing authors now.

Andrew Rothman
President
Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance
http://www.gocra.org

[bstrawse]

The MN Gun Owners PAC also strongly supports suppressor legislation - it was an item in our endorsement evaluations for candidates last fall - and will be something we track closely this year.

We have this as one of the legislative priorities on our joint legislative agenda w/ GOCRA.

Bryan

[greenfarmer]

The MN Gun Owners PAC also strongly supports suppressor legislation - it was an item in our endorsement evaluations for candidates last fall - and will be something we track closely this year.

We have this as one of the legislative priorities on our joint legislative agenda w/ GOCRA.

Bryan

I would love to see it pass. But like Mr Gruenhagen said. They almost had it a while ago, but Dayton opposed it. And now with Governor Goofy, I really have my doubts. That guy is out of control. Some of the things he has said and done recently, leaves me smh constantly. There's no rhyme or reason to the things he says and does. And no sense of reason with that guy. And everytime you see him speak, he looks heavily medicated.

[Lights]

I don't know much about politics. But isn't there any way around Governor Goofy? Or is that azzhat the final say on everything?

[yuppiejr]

There's a solution to the first problem you described which would help you find and hopefully understand the answer to both of your questions.

I don't know much about politics. But isn't there any way around Governor Goofy? Or is that azzhat the final say on everything?

[greenfarmer]

There's a solution to the first problem you described which would help you find and hopefully understand the answer to both of your questions.

I don't know much about politics. But isn't there any way around Governor Goofy? Or is that azzhat the final say on everything?

Someone wake up on the wrong side of the bed today?

[yuppiejr]

There's a solution to the first problem you described which would help you find and hopefully understand the answer to both of your questions.

I don't know much about politics. But isn't there any way around Governor Goofy? Or is that azzhat the final say on everything?

Someone wake up on the wrong side of the bed today?

Nope, I think my advice is perfectly sound... We live in an age in which anyone with a bit of patience and time can empower and educate themselves on almost any subject and therefore not rely on others to do their thinking for them. I use a variation regularly at work when people ask me questions to which they could just as easily find the answer.. "let me Google that for you."

http://lmgtfy.com/

On the topic, yes, a 2/3 majority in both houses can override the governor's veto and thus pass the law, assuming you could get some D's on board (Google! - http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/vetoes/aboutveto.aspx ). Best way to get the law passed? Elect the right people.