Gun Control Bill introduced in MN

fishthumper wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>CaptainMusky wrote:</div>
Texas and Florida have been getting a tremendous influx of new residents from states like MN. This is the first time in my life that I would consider moving. If my wife being a teacher wouldnt get totally screwed salary wise in the move we likely would be seriously looking. I can work anywhere and come out fine or probably better off.

The bad news for Texas is a lot of those influx people are coming from Calf. That should be interesting. Gun toting redneck Conservatives mixing in with Bleeding heart Liberals. I just hope those Calf. transplants don’t water down and turn that state like they have a few others

Yup. They are like a virus. I too love MN (and Wi). It bothers me a lot my home state of Mi and Mn are turning into such liberal strongholds. Cold weather northern states used to equate to toughness, not the opposite.

suzuki wrote:

All this law does is give them another tool to vilify gun owners, especially WHEN THEY ARE ROBBED.

all that misdemeanor stuff about storage is smoke. and if a child accesses a loaded gun there are already laws in place to address that kind of negligence.

but the felony for a stolen gun being used to commit a crime is the real issue buried in this bill. is a gun in a locked car secured? is a gun in a locked house secured? is the victim of a burglary now a felon? smh.

and the proof of locking device stuff is a direct attempt to prevent private sales. how does one prove this? showing the person a lock? sending them receipts that they have to keep forever? i do think private sales can be a bit too “wild west” but unenforceable laws are even worse.

gimruis wrote:

I agree with this. I highly doubt the people in this thread that are threatening to leave are serious about doing it too. Just picking up your entire life on a whim and moving across the country isn’t exactly easy to do to. I just moved 6 miles last May and hated every minute of the process.

I’m not saying I’m going to pack up and move anytime soon, but I can not see myself staying in this state once I’m retired. Just far to many reasons to move someplace else. The political situation just sits at near the top of the list.

fishthumper wrote:

I’m not saying I’m going to pack up and move anytime soon, but I can not see myself staying in this state once I’m retired. Just far to many reasons to move someplace else. The political situation just sits at near the top of the list.

Im in the same boat as this unless something changes drastically in the next decade or so. This state is getting far too much like California 2.0 and that is a terrible state to model after.

I left Mn in 2001 to live in a state that is not run by libs.
Feel sorry for those that can’t.

Making Gun laws is one thing. Being able to enforce them is another. Most gun owners seem to sit back and do nothing when these type of laws are being passed. I think the day they start trying to enforce some of these laws will be a different situation. If/when they decide to start enforcing these laws is when things may start to get real serious.

fishthumper wrote:

Making Gun laws is one thing. Being able to enforce them is another. Most gun owners seem to sit back and do nothing when these type of laws are being passed. I think the day they start trying to enforce some of these laws will be a different situation. If/when they decide to start enforcing these laws is when things may start to get real serious.

Yes, that’s why this is much to do about nothing. Just a smokescreen, as Michael stated. Just be responsible for your firearms and there won’t ever be an issue.

I assume this would relieve you of any penalty if your home was burglarized.

Subd. 4. Limitations. Subdivision 3, paragraphs (a) to (d), do not apply if access to the firearm was obtained as a result of an unlawful entry into a structure where the firearm is located.

Joe Jarl wrote:

I assume this would relieve you of any penalty if your home was burglarized.

Subd. 4. Limitations. Subdivision 3, paragraphs (a) to (d), do not apply if access to the firearm was obtained as a result of an unlawful entry into a structure where the firearm is located.

Now that makes sense, so that must be a error somehow.

I dont think anyone really thinks about law when actually defending their life. A true them or me scenario. To do so could cost yours.

Regarding the must report stolen thing. That one is a scary door to open because it sounds so reasonable

The actual motivation is that if someone tells the ATF, “I lost it in a boating accident,” the state can criminally charge you.

What’s going to happen is MN will eventually push a ban on “assault weapons.” Non-compliance will be 90+%. When the brown shirts pay you a visit and you claim you “lost it,” you become a criminal for not reporting it. If you claim you transferred it to someone out of state they’ll inquire as to the FFL that was used to process the transfer. If you didn’t use an FFL to transfer the gun to a resident of another state, you’ve violated federal law. It’s not that complicated.

IDO now stands for In Depth Overrractions.

This isn’t a precursor to more regulation. It’s the only thing they’ll be able to get passed because even the elected democrats know their constituents don’t want anymore gun control.

This will touted as a huge win for the dems when in actuality it means nothing.

Youbetcha wrote:

I would not be surprised to see a “High Capacity” Magazine ban in the next month or so.

I’ve been preparing by only buying 10rd 458 socom magazines

Matt Moen wrote:

IDO now stands for In Depth Overrractions.

This isn’t a precursor to more regulation. It’s the only thing they’ll be able to get passed because even the elected democrats know their constituents don’t want anymore gun control.

This will touted as a huge win for the dems when in actuality it means nothing.

As far as a this being a overaction, you may be a correct. as far as this not being a precursor to more and bigger laws, Only time will tell. My guess is you will be wrong on that one.
I also believe you are wrong about Democrats constituents not wanting more gun control laws. Keep in mind criminals are all in Favor of more gun laws. They don’t follow laws.

Gun control doesn’t work. Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the US and in 2022 there were 2600 shootings and 630 homicides. Great place to live.

I have kids so I’m not going anywhere. Always told myself I’d never move while they are in school. However retirement is shaping up to be Winter and Spring in Florida and Summer and Fall in South Dakota. Can pretty much be fishing and hunting year round.

I’m personally hopeful the US Supreme Court will uphold Second Amendment law, creating a fundamental right to carry a concealed firearm and declaring that all restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms are presumptively unconstitutional nation wide.

***All restrictions including the ones proposed above.

There are several cases working their way through the appeal process now. Just a matter of time IMO.

-J.

The $17 Billion surplus did not come because the state underspent. MN is simply overtaxed. Much of the $1000/$2000 checks will not go to those that actually overpaid taxes ! It will be a redistribution.

Walz and his crew took the election as a mandate to bring about spending increases and social agenda changes. Go back and look what he said in November. Nothing here is a surprise.

From what I heard and understand to be true…

1) Without the landslide victory in Hennepin County, many statewide seats may have moved Republican

2) Probably enough (small number but enough) women voting on reproductive rights (single issue) to sway some key seats thought to be leaning Republican to the DFL. Ramifications on all other social agenda issues are huge.

If you look back a dozen years (there about) when the Republicans tried to put a State Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage … it not only failed it pulled the DFL up … young voters turned up in mass that year to push down the NO lever … the rest … well …

Matt Moen – I agree and stated above that there should be enough rural DFL members that will not support gun control. We will see.

Notice that gun control bill came after other social agenda issues (abortion, marijuana, etc). If this one gets through … they will try take it up another notch.

To be honest – I believe this one was introduced after the DFL knew they had enough or close to enough support … again we will see.

Lindy – FL and SD have no state personal income tax – which I am sure you are fully aware of.

Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming do not levy state income taxes, while New Hampshire doesn’t tax earned wages.

lindyrig79 wrote:

I have kids so I’m not going anywhere. Always told myself I’d never move while they are in school. However retirement is shaping up to be Winter and Spring in Florida and Summer and Fall in South Dakota. Can pretty much be fishing and hunting year round.

Those are two great choices !!!!

Sylvanboat wrote:

Gun control doesn’t work. Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the US and in 2022 there were 2600 shootings and 630 homicides. Great place to live.

Google the per capita homicide rate and see what you get.

States that have no income tax are getting their money from somewhere. Whether it is higher property tax, sales tax or a different tax. There are no free rides, or I should say shouldn’t be any free rides. There are always ways some find to skirt around paying your fair share.

Brittman wrote:

Lindy – FL and SD have no state personal income tax – which I am sure you are fully aware of.

Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming do not levy state income taxes, while New Hampshire doesn’t tax earned wages.

I looked at Florida for a winter vacation home/ and maybe summer rental, but with the insurance fiasco with past hurricanes, and many well known companies refusing to insure properties there, or if they do they have ungodly rates. That situation leaves many people to rely on the state funded property insurance program. A program with the last hurricane that showed how flawed the insurance was, I thought against buying in Florida.

lindyrig79 wrote:

I have kids so I’m not going anywhere. Always told myself I’d never move while they are in school. However retirement is shaping up to be Winter and Spring in Florida and Summer and Fall in South Dakota. Can pretty much be fishing and hunting year round.

mojogunter wrote:

States that have no income tax are getting their money from somewhere. Whether it is higher property tax, sales tax or a different tax. There are no free rides, or I should say shouldn’t be any free rides. There are always ways some find to skirt around paying your fair share.

Right they do, they tax clothes and food unlike us and they also have higher property taxes, but I would sure rather have those things than it coming out of my paycheck. It makes far more sense to tax WHAT you are purchasing because you can control that and seems to be a far more fair way to collect tax.

mojogunter wrote:

There are no free rides, or I should say shouldn’t be any free rides. There are always ways some find to skirt around paying your fair share.

I have no problem paying a fair share. I do have a problem with who it is that decides what each persons fair share is. The current situation is no where near equal Fair share.
I don’t think this is equal fair share :

High-Income Taxpayers Paid the Majority of Federal Income Taxes.

In 2020, the bottom half of taxpayers earned 10.2 percent of total AGI and paid 2.3 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 1 percent earned 22.2 percent of total AGI and paid 42.3 percent of all federal income taxes.

In all, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid $723 billion in income taxes while the bottom 90 percent paid $450 billion.

But FishThumper they want the rich to pay their “fair share”! What a damn joke.

https://www.criminalattorneycincinnati.com/comparing-gun-control-measures-to-gun-related-homicides-by-state/
This is a pretty interesting comparison of “gun Friendliness” to crime ratios. I didn’t realize MN already had such a low friendliness towards firearms. Maybe its my microbiome that affects my perception.

Joe Jarl wrote:

I assume this would relieve you of any penalty if your home was burglarized.

Subd. 4. Limitations. Subdivision 3, paragraphs (a) to (d), do not apply if access to the firearm was obtained as a result of an unlawful entry into a structure where the firearm is located.

But will you be guilty of not having proper storage if your firearms are stolen?

This is just a means to make firearm ownership more complicated and difficult.

Matt Moen wrote:

IDO now stands for In Depth Overrractions.

This isn’t a precursor to more regulation. It’s the only thing they’ll be able to get passed because even the elected democrats know their constituents don’t want anymore gun control.

This will touted as a huge win for the dems when in actuality it means nothing.

Bingo.