Hearing March 21

[870TC]

Lesch's HF285 meeting tonight 530 pm room 10 State Office Building. Paymar attempt to add his gunshow loop hole wording to this bill??

[The Verminator]

We could also wonder if he might try to sneak in some stuff on our concealed carry permits--either the "May" issue language or issue by police chiefs instead of sheriffs or limiting its use to one year for buying guns.

[2in2out]

From GOCRA's summary page for the bills proposed this sesion:

HF 285 (Lesch) / SF 235 (Latz) Fifth degree assault and domestic assault provisions added to crime of violence, ban on felon in possession of ammunition, aiding and abetting.
BAD , but possible fixable

GOCRA’s view: While the purpose of the bill is sound, it contains some overly broad provisions and and troubling language. We believe that we could work with the author to mold this into a bill that gun owners could support.

Status: Scheduled to be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, February 21 starting at noon.

Risk to your rights: Moderate

Anybody know if they were able to "fix" the bill before today?

I guess what I;m asking is what to tell the committee members. Should I say that I oppose this bill 100%, or should I say don't touch it and don't stick anything else into it? Or... ?

[jshuberg]

The 5:30 meeting will hear HF285. I don't know if the 24 hour rule has been suspended, probably, so expect last minute amendments by Paymar. This bill hasn't really been discussed much here. I went back and found the GOCRA analysis on their web site:

HF 285 (Lesch) / SF 235 (Latz): Fifth degree assault and domestic assault provisions added to crime of violence, ban on felon in possession of ammunition, aiding and abetting.

BAD, but possible fixable

GOCRA’s view: While the purpose of the bill is sound, it contains some overly broad provisions and and troubling language. We believe that we could work with the author to mold this into a bill that gun owners could support.

Risk to your rights: Moderate

I don't know if the bill has been amended to address GOCRA's concerns or not, we'll find out at the hearing. I believe this is the last opportunity to pass a bill out of committee before the Friday deadline, so we should expect some shenanigans.

Once again, thanks to the GOCRA and NRA guys for staying on top of all of this craziness for us. So far nothing dangerous to our rights has been passed out of committee, lets keep up the effort until all threats have been eliminated!


EDIT: Woopsie, sorry about the duplicate info. I didn't see the previous post until after I hit submit.

[2in2out]

HF285 Ammended:

http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/comm/docs/H0285DE6.pdf

Live video feed now:
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/htv/mnhouse.asx

[Hmac]

Trying to plug the gun show loophole?

[The Verminator]

That was quick.

[2in2out]

HF285 passed the committee as ammended, 10-8

Cornish is not a happy camper - said he looks forward to a lengthy debate with Paymar on the House floor, called the ammendment a "poison pill".

[Flyby]

So basically the way it would stand is if you wanted to sell either a hand gun or "Assault rifle" at a designated gun show you would have to verify the buyer had a permit to purchase or carry.

[BigBlue]

One more step down the slope... Or 'death by a thousand paper cuts'.

[oldhunter]

Here is a link to the amendment http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/comm/docs/H0285DE6.pdf Nothing in this bill to deter what happened in any of those shootings they say they want to stop. Now we will see how they house will vote. My representative although he is a democrat says he will vote against the bill. We'll see if that holds up.

[westhope]

Here is the "gunshow" part:

Sec. 7. [624.7133] GUN SHOWS; TRANSFERS OF PISTOLS AND
6.22 SEMIAUTOMATIC MILITARY-STYLE ASSAULT WEAPONS.
6.23 Subdivision 1. Definitions. For the purposes of this section, "gun show" means the
6.24 entire premises open to the public for an event or function, that is sponsored and has the
6.25 primary purpose of facilitating the purchase, sale, or offer for sale, of firearms at which 25
6.26 or more firearms are offered for transfer, and ten or more persons are offering one or more
6.27 firearms for transfer. The "entire premises" includes, but is not limited to, parking areas
6.28 and areas open to the public that are used by attendees during the event or function.
6.29 Subd. 2. Transfers; proof of eligibility required. (a) No person shall transfer a
6.30 pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon at a gun show unless the transferor
6.31 or the transferee is a federally licensed firearms dealer except as provided in this section.
6.32 (b) When two parties, neither of whom is a federally licensed firearms dealer,
6.33 desire to transfer a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon at a gun
6.34 show, the transferee must present the transferor a valid permit to purchase issued under
Sec. 7. 6
03/20/13 09:13 PM HOUSE RESEARCH JD/NH H0285DE6
7.1 section 624.7131 or a valid permit to carry a pistol issued under section 624.714 prior to
7.2 completing the transfer.
7.3 Subd. 3. Exclusion. This section does not apply to transfers of antique firearms as
7.4 defined in section 624.712, subdivision 3.
7.5 EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective August 1, 2013."
7.6 Amend the title accordingly
Sec. 7.

[jshuberg]

So basically the way it would stand is if you wanted to sell either a hand gun or "Assault rifle" at a designated gun show you would have to verify the buyer had a permit to purchase or carry.

That's the language that was passed out of committee. There were conversations in the back of the room by the Protect MN folks about how they intend to "fix" it by amending it on the house floor. They needed something to pass out of committee before Friday, so they watered down the language until they had something that would make the opposing Dems flip and support it.

With it's passage, the fight now moves on to the house floor. Emailing and calling your representatives is now more important than ever! Point out how much this bill had to be gutted in order to pass out of committee, and what happens when Democrats pass unpopular gun control measures - many are thrown out of office and control of the legislature changes hands.

It might look fairly benign at the moment, but Paymar has already stated he intends to reintroduce universal background checks and a firearm registry back into it when it's introduced on the floor.

It would have been nice if we could have shut the whole thing down tonight, but by passing this watered down bill they now get another bite at the apple on the house floor. It's not over yet!

[tabberski]

Sorry trying to play catch up here just got out of work. So the proposed bill HF285 has already been heard is that correct?

[jshuberg]

Yes. It was heard, amended, and passed out of committee.