Respectfully, I do not want 'Constitutional Carry' in MN :)

[bensdad]

+1 great post!

[mrp]

Quick question.

Has there been a constitutional carry bill introduced in Minnesota in the last 15 years? (or ever, for that matter.)

[unfitmother]

...
Respectfully, I do not want 'Constitutional Carry' in MN
I want a threshold for carrying a firearm, and prohibitions for 'offenders'
...

gunsmith, why is offenders in quotes? What criteria do you want used to restrict who can carry a gun?

Personally, I think the prison industrial complex, the War on Drugs and Saturday night special laws have done a great job of keeping guns outta poor people's hands.

[dismal]

Quick question.

Has there been a constitutional carry bill introduced in Minnesota in the last 15 years? (or ever, for that matter.)

Before carry permits were institutied in the 70's, I believe that we had constitutional carry in MN.

Sent from my SPH-M950 using Tapatalk

[bstrawse]

Quick question.

Has there been a constitutional carry bill introduced in Minnesota in the last 15 years? (or ever, for that matter.)

Before carry permits were institutied in the 70's, I believe that we had constitutional carry in MN.

Sent from my SPH-M950 using Tapatalk

That is correct.

[gunsmith]

I think the year was 1974

[mrp]

Quick question.

Has there been a constitutional carry bill introduced in Minnesota in the last 15 years? (or ever, for that matter.)

Before carry permits were institutied in the 70's, I believe that we had constitutional carry in MN.

Sent from my SPH-M950 using Tapatalk

That is correct.

Thanks.

[gunsmith]

...
Respectfully, I do not want 'Constitutional Carry' in MN
I want a threshold for carrying a firearm, and prohibitions for 'offenders'
...

gunsmith, why is offenders in quotes? What criteria do you want used to restrict who can carry a gun?

Personally, I think the prison industrial complex, the War on Drugs and Saturday night special laws have done a great job of keeping guns outta poor people's hands.

unfit, that was a while ago and I don't remember. By 'offenders' I assume I was intending to denote 'Felons' and those who've had 3 dwi convictions in 10 years...(a rough guide used in issuing permits ...but not in the Statute) and so on.

[AFTERMATH]

If we can't trust someone to act responsibly with a firearm - why do we let them roam the streets to begin with?

[xd ED]

If we can't trust someone to act responsibly with a firearm - why do we let them roam the streets to begin with?

Freedom?….Liberty?

[Rip Van Winkle]

If we can't trust someone to act responsibly with a firearm - why do we let them roam the streets to begin with?

Freedom?….Liberty?

What antiquated concepts. [/sarcasm]

[Lights]

I'm kinda bummed. I thought you were on our side. Apparently, for you, liberty is something the government portions out to the privileged, connected and wealthy. Oh well... as long as you got yours.

My thoughts also. Why the hell should I have to pay (pay for class and permit) to carry and be able to protect my family and myself when we are out and about?

[gunsmith]

I'm kinda bummed. I thought you were on our side. Apparently, for you, liberty is something the government portions out to the privileged, connected and wealthy. Oh well... as long as you got yours.

My thoughts also. Why the hell should I have to pay (pay for class and permit) to carry and be able to protect my family and myself when we are out and about?

In 1974 we in Minnesota had 'Constitutional Carry' One of the central players in CCRN Concealed Carry Reform Now. (the predecessor to GOCRA I believe) lamented that it's just not likely that we'll get back to that condition.

But let's say that in 12 months all the laws in MN were changed to allow 'Constutional Carry' I think in 24 months we'd be SO EMBARRASSED WITH THE BAD BEHAVIOR OF OUR FELLOW MAN, that we'd WANT some carry restrictions. But of course we'd have A-Holes firing guns into the air to back off neighbors etc that it wouldn't be our choice as to what restrictions would be made into law....the Anti's would have the momentum to pass very restrictive laws.

What laws we would get would be determined by the 'Stupid People' running Amok....and in 48 months we would be worse off than we are now....

That's my logic.

Go Ahead be as idealistic as you want....I think I'm seeing what would 'practically ' be happening. Geographically and Culturally this is MINNESOTA not Alaska, Arizona, Montana or Utah. The practical democrats of OUTSTATE MINNESOTA are the ones protecting our rights at the level we have now....and I'm grateful that they can vote down the weasels (paymar / Lutz) of the city democrats.

In NY and Illionis the sensible outstaters are just overwhelmed by the city rats.

[Pat Cannon]

In 1974 we in Minnesota had 'Constitutional Carry' One of the central players in CCRN Concealed Carry Reform Now. (the predecessor to GOCRA I believe) lamented that it's just not likely that we'll get back to that condition.

But let's say that in 12 months all the laws in MN were changed to allow 'Constutional Carry' I think in 24 months we'd be SO EMBARRASSED WITH THE BAD BEHAVIOR OF OUR FELLOW MAN, that we'd WANT some carry restrictions. But of course we'd have A-Holes firing guns into the air to back off neighbors etc that it wouldn't be our choice as to what restrictions would be made into law....the Anti's would have the momentum to pass very restrictive laws.

What kept people from engaging in all this embarrassing bad behavior before 1974? Were there no A-Holes then?

[Lights]

I'm kinda bummed. I thought you were on our side. Apparently, for you, liberty is something the government portions out to the privileged, connected and wealthy. Oh well... as long as you got yours.

My thoughts also. Why the hell should I have to pay (pay for class and permit) to carry and be able to protect my family and myself when we are out and about?

In 1974 we in Minnesota had 'Constitutional Carry' One of the central players in CCRN Concealed Carry Reform Now. (the predecessor to GOCRA I believe) lamented that it's just not likely that we'll get back to that condition.

But let's say that in 12 months all the laws in MN were changed to allow 'Constutional Carry' I think in 24 months we'd be SO EMBARRASSED WITH THE BAD BEHAVIOR OF OUR FELLOW MAN, that we'd WANT some carry restrictions. But of course we'd have A-Holes firing guns into the air to back off neighbors etc that it wouldn't be our choice as to what restrictions would be made into law....the Anti's would have the momentum to pass very restrictive laws.

What laws we would get would be determined by the 'Stupid People' running Amok....and in 48 months we would be worse off than we are now....

That's my logic.

Go Ahead be as idealistic as you want....I think I'm seeing what would 'practically ' be happening. Geographically and Culturally this is MINNESOTA not Alaska, Arizona, Montana or Utah. The practical democrats of OUTSTATE MINNESOTA are the ones protecting our rights at the level we have now....and I'm grateful that they can vote down the weasels (paymar / Lutz) of the city democrats.

In NY and Illionis the sensible outstaters are just overwhelmed by the city rats.

There are a hell of a lot of more gun owners in this state without a carry permit than with a carry permit. Most all of the thugs will never spend the money to get a carry permit. But that does not stop them from carrying. I see were your thought process is but I respectfully disagree with you.