OK, this is a porly documented misheard indeed but the subject made me perk up immediatekly. My coworker was driving in this morning and thought he heard something about the Carry law and convenience stores and changes being made because of all the violence lately. He THINKS it was in the tone of more limitations / repeal. He DOESN'T remember which station it was on or if it was news or commentary...

So, anyone here hear anything remotely like this on the radio today?

Interesting since most of the robberies at convienience stores of late have been with knives.

I'm chalking it up to misheard misremembered aggregate of several comments but I was curious none the less.

I heard it too:

http://www.startribune.com/587/story/411932.html


StarTribune.com GUNS050406

Last update: May 04, 2006 – 11:58 AM
NRA, legislators want right to fire in self-defense expanded
Gun rights advocates want Minnesotans to be free to stand their ground with deadly force against attackers anywhere, not just in their own homes.

Conrad deFiebre, Star Tribune
Having secured the right of most Minnesotans to carry firearms in public, gun rights advocates began moving Thursday to expand the legal freedom to shoot in self-defense.

A bill introduced by Republican legislators and backed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) would allow the use of deadly force against an attacker anywhere citizens have a legal right to be, if they reasonably believe they face imminent danger of death or substantial bodily harm.

The legislation would codify and extend court decisions that already authorize deadly force against an intruder in one's own home. It would eliminate a legal duty to retreat as a first line of self-defense and allow the use of "superior force" -- a gun against an unarmed assailant, for example -- "so long as the individual's objective is defense."

Rep. Tony Cornish, R-Good Thunder, said the measure, known as the "Castle Doctrine" or the "Stand Your Ground Law," is needed to give law-abiding citizens more rights than those accorded violent criminals.

"This bill basically tells the bad guys: If you're going to use illegal force, be prepared to face legal force," he said at a State Capitol news conference.

Cornish introduced his bill in the House on Thursday, but said he will not seek to advance it until next year. Backed by the NRA and other gun-rights advocates, similar legislation has already been enacted in Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi and South Dakota.

About 20 other states are considering the initiative, Cornish said.

Conrad deFiebre • 651-222-1673

©2006 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.

Which station by chance? Perhaps that will jog his memory.

Local news on KSTP AM-1500. It was in regards to the Strib story I posted above.

(Local news is probably the same on all Hubbard affiliates)

I wonder who is confused, Tony or Conrad?

"Castle Doctrine" and "Stand Your Ground" are separate topics. We already have Castle Doctrine codified in Minnesota law.

I heard on MPR at lunch today that the castle doctrine was to be expanded (proposed legislation) to extend outside ones home; thus making it more like a stand-your-ground law.

joel lj'd about it and provided a link to the legislation proposed:
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/ ... ssion=ls84

Neither, actually. In Florida, at least, the proponents of what we could more accurately call "stand your ground" tried to brand it as "Castle Doctrine." (See the NRA magazines.)

They failed in the branding, but succeeded in the passing. I'll settle for that here.

This has been in the mill for about a month.

The Minnesota Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (CCRN's parent organization) is supporting it. I was at the press conference this morning and had a talk with Conrad and the new AP guy about it.

That's strange I seem to remember it being stated emphatically at a CCRN meet not so long ago, that there was no way the lege (specifically the republican legislators) would be considering any gun rights legislation, or extensions to the carry law this year. What changed?

Wasn't there a CCRN meeting this week? This is exactly the type of thing I would have expected to have been discussed there. I guess I need to make some of those meetings.

Well, that latter was at least partly in response to Tim very effectively politicking against my proposals behind the scenes during the hiatus he'd asked me for -- and gotten -- in moving them forward (as was, of course, his right; there's some implications to that which may be worth discussing further some point, and will be discussed further at some point, although not in this venue); it wasn't a plan so much as an attempt to sink my legislative plan. (And it worked very, very well -- which isn't to say that the idea of doing something this year would necessarily have happened without Tim's efforts.)

And, as Joe's message shows, this has apparently been in the works for awhile, also behind the scenes. (I hadn't heard a word about it.)

That said, while Tony Cornish has put the bill in now, he's made it clear that he's not going to push for its passage until the next session.

Might be something to campaign on, though.

I'm in favor of it, certainly, but my own belief is that it'll be at least a five-year effort, unless we manage to keep both a real pro-gun Governor, and the Senate, in which case it'll be at least a three-year effort.

Nothing.

The bill won't be considered until next year. It is part of a national initiative by the NRA. It has passed in 10 states and is under consideration in a dozen more. FWIW, it passed the Michigan House last week by 90-16.

Minnesota has had the in-the-home version of the "castle doctrine" since 1963 so the bill is not earth shaking for us. It probably will pass next year..