|
|
|
It is currently Tue Apr 23, 2024 7:59 pm
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.
All times are UTC - 6 hours
URGENT: Hunter "convenience" bill SCREWS metro re
| Author |
Message |
|
djeepp
|
Post subject:  Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:57 am |
|
| Senior Member |
 |
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 2:14 pm
Posts: 203
|
princewally wrote: From Mary Kiffmeyer: Quote: Jason
I appreciate your consideration of intentions that may go wrong.
Below is some information given to me. What might be your thoughts on this.
Currently you cannot carry an uncased gun in the 7 county metro area. The metro area never had these rights.
The Author and Co Author of this bill tell me that we are gaining far more than we are losing, which is nothing. The 7 county metro area was exempted from the law to get it thru committee and onto the floor because this exemption is currently in place so no net loss. The authors said that it was a deal they made to keep the bill on track and the overall benefits for sportsmen and women are far greater than letting it die. They do not believe this sets a precedent or degrades the preemption statute.
The authors both say that they are very pro gun. Matter of fact, Rep. Cornish was a past lobbyist for the NRA and was the author of both the Personal Protection Act, Guns on Campus and the Castle Doctrine. He states this is a good bill and people are mis-understanding the content of this bill and what it does. To be clear, the exemption is current law. This bill moves us forward with no loss of rights from what we have currently and instead gives us a great gain.
If the bill passes before us now, you would be able to carry an uncased gun on shooting preserves and on shooting ranges within the metro area and also, as soon as you leave the metro, you would also be able to.
I hope this is helpful. Please let me know your thoughts.
Thank you for writing.
Mary While it looks as though Ms. Kiffmeyer was thoughtful enough to talk to the authors of the bill and give you a adequate response, it appears she doesn't have an opinion at all. She is just regurgitating what she was told by Dill and Cornish.
I know she is a good conservative, but this response is typical political speak for, "This isn't my problem. I'm going to do what I am told."
_________________
"It's a piece of cake to bake a pretty cake"
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
princewally
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:57 am |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 11:02 am
Posts: 1684
Location: St Louis Park
|
|
Yeah, I let her know my thoughts about what she had to say. She hasn't responded to that.
_________________
Of the people, By the People, For the People. The government exists to serve us, not the reverse.
--------------------
Next MN carry permit class: TBD.
Permit to Carry MN
--------------------
jason <at> metrodefense <dot> com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ree
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:13 am |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 9:55 pm
Posts: 742
Location: Twin Cities
|
|
She and many others clearly view this as "gaining rights" or "gaining privileges." We should all help them look at it as easing restrictions on rights.
When you view it this way then it's easier to imagine how antis fit into the story. The antis are not so complacent that restrictions aren't going to be allowed to be eased without some quid pro quo. If we're getting improvements in our firearms laws, what are the antis getting? ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
joelr
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:31 am |
|
| The Man |
 |
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:43 am
Posts: 7970
Location: Minneapolis MN
|
ree wrote: She and many others clearly view this as "gaining rights" or "gaining privileges." We should all help them look at it as easing restrictions on rights.
When you view it this way then it's easier to imagine how antis fit into the story. The antis are not so complacent that restrictions aren't going to be allowed to be eased without some quid pro quo. If we're getting improvements in our firearms laws, what are the antis getting? ... Apparently, thanks to our "friends," they're getting, oh, the "closing the 'gun show loophole'" thing they wanted, complete with a backdoor gun registration scheme.
All this, so some duck hunters up north can leave the cases on shore.
_________________
Just a guy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JimC
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:54 am |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:56 pm
Posts: 1109
|
|
Will the Gov sign this bill?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
plblark
|
Post subject: Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:58 am |
|
| Longtime Regular |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 10:41 am
Posts: 4468
|
It IS a giant omnibus Natural Resources bill... Provides good cover doesn't it? ... Let's not find out how far it can go and how much momentum it can gain, let's kill it.
hmm.. Seems that's been the suggestion for quite awhile 
_________________
Certified Carry Permit Instructor (MNTactics.com and ShootingSafely.com)
Click here for current Carry Classes
"There is no safety for honest men, except by believing all possible evil of evil men." - Edwin Burke
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.
All times are UTC - 6 hours
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|
|
