Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-18-2023, 11:49 AM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,493
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Minnesota Sheriff Speaks Out Against Proposed Ammunition Legislation

Sheriff speaks out against proposed ammunition legislation

Quote:
New proposed legislation is receiving pushback from a number of law enforcement, including Ryan Shea, sheriff for Freeborn County.

According to Shea, the bill ? House File 396/Senate File 916 ? is meant to require gun owners to store and lock firearms separately from ammunition, which is required to be locked up inside a home. A violation of the law precludes a person from acquiring a permit to carry. The bill, if passed, would hold gun owners responsible for locking up their firearms.

?One of the big things is that it?s inside somebody?s home,? he said. ?We shouldn?t be regulating stuff like that inside somebody?s home.?...

?We have 720 square miles here in Freeborn County, and there?s no possible way to staff enough people to make sure that every homeowner is always safe,? he said. ?People have to take it upon their own responsibility for self-defense at some point.?

And not allowing people to store loaded firearms inside their homes for that defense was something he felt was unconstitutional.

His solution to the proposed bills: throw them away...

?There?s over 70 sheriffs that I know that oppose it out of the 87 in Minnesota,? he said, while noting he hadn?t heard a response from metro area sheriffs.

Shea and 12 other sheriffs in the 6th District wrote a letter to state representatives earlier this week expressing concern for the bill.
Minnesota House File 396

Minnesota Senate File 916

Below is (ostensibly) a copy of the letter...





Another letter from a different Sheriff endorsed by the 13 Sheriffs...

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-19-2023, 3:30 AM
Scooooter7 Scooooter7 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: P. Hill
Posts: 183
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

IMO, when local city, county, state LE, do not desire or are not able to enforce the laws due to staffing, etc., the Fed answer is to add a FEDERAL law enforcement.

You know, the ones that will be wanting to violate all of your constitutional and religious freedoms as a US citizen.
__________________
The Book of Daniel says "the writing is on the wall"
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-19-2023, 5:05 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,847
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Wait, isn't this Heller redux? Heller required the owner to keep the firearms unloaded and in a separate room from the firearm. Held: the law was unconstitutional. So how is this supposed to avoid a challenge?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-25-2023, 6:51 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,493
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

There's even more happening in Minnesota. From today... Minnesota Legislature considering 2 gun control proposals

Quote:
The Minnesota House was considering a ?red flag law? on Tuesday to allow the temporary confiscation of guns from people judged to be an immediate threat to themselves or others, as well as a proposal for expanded background checks for firearms transfers.

The two gun measures are part of a wide-ranging public safety bill that lawmakers were expected to debate late into the night before ultimately passing it...

Rob Doar, a lobbyist with the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, said in an interview that he?s ?pretty confident? there won?t be enough votes in the Senate for a red flag law. He said he does expect Senate support, however, for background check language that?s stronger than current law but doesn?t go as far as the House bill...
Then there's SF 1723... Concealed carry of firearms modification...

Quote:
A bill for an act relating to public safety; modifying concealed carry of firearms; banning possession of large capacity ammunition magazines, ghost guns, and other weapons; prohibiting open carry of firearms; providing for reasonable regulation of firearms; providing for rulemaking...
And more... Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus & PAC
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-25-2023, 9:45 PM
Supersapper's Avatar
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 65 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrappedinCalifornia View Post
So how would they enforce it? If the bill passed as they desire it, how would someone know that the firearm was or wasn't locked up? All law enforcement is going to do when they come out to a defense scene is see that they have the following three things:
1. a gun which was loaded,
2. a family which is safe,
3. lastly, a body which is dead.

I'm pretty sure the home owner won't dime himself out, but would probably say that he "must've been faster than I thought getting that safe open."
__________________
--Magazines for Sig Sauer P6
--Walther P-38. Prefer Pre 1945
--Luger P08

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-27-2023, 4:45 AM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,493
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
So how would they enforce it?...
Actual enforcement vs. judicious or malicious or nefarious use of 'selective enforcement' is a question for later. First, they've got to get it on the books and it's looking as though that is in the process of happening. From this morning... Minnesota House advances gun control measures

Quote:
Members of the Minnesota House on Wednesday night, April 26, approved a public safety package that includes two gun control proposals.

Universal background checks and "red-flag" court orders to temporarily remove guns from people deemed an imminent threat to themselves or others are another step closer to becoming Minnesota law...

After hours of debate on the bill that started Tuesday night and resumed Wednesday afternoon, the House safety package and the gun control proposals passed 69-60 nearly on party lines...

Under the "red flag" law proposal, family members could petition a court to temporarily ban someone from possessing firearms if they pose a significant risk to themselves or others. Law enforcement and prosecutors could also obtain the orders.

With universal background checks, private sales of firearms like pistols and semi-automatic rifles would require more paperwork. Both parties involved in a sale would have to present a valid transfer permit or permit to carry and government ID. Law enforcement agencies would issue the permits.

Owners would have to present a record of transfer upon request of a law officer investigating a crime.

Transfers between immediate family members and those involving a firearms dealer or law enforcement would be exempted...

The Senate passed a public safety package earlier this month on a 34-33 party-line vote that contains funding for gun control but not the red flag or background check policies. The House and Senate will now have to iron out those differences in a conference committee before they can vote on a final bill they can send to the governor...
Back in March, the NRA-ILA provided a page... Minnesota: Numerous Anti-Gun Bills Introduced

The bottom line is that many would currently consider it specious to ask how such laws will be enforced in that if they are prevented from becoming law, then enforcement is a non-issue. Unfortunately, while it currently looks as though at least some of this is going to make it through the state legislature, the courts will be the next step. Then...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-27-2023, 11:42 AM
Supersapper's Avatar
Supersapper Supersapper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,102
iTrader: 65 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrappedinCalifornia View Post
Actual enforcement vs. judicious or malicious or nefarious use of 'selective enforcement' is a question for later. First, they've got to get it on the books and it's looking as though that is in the process of happening. From this morning... Minnesota House advances gun control measures



Back in March, the NRA-ILA provided a page... Minnesota: Numerous Anti-Gun Bills Introduced

The bottom line is that many would currently consider it specious to ask how such laws will be enforced in that if they are prevented from becoming law, then enforcement is a non-issue. Unfortunately, while it currently looks as though at least some of this is going to make it through the state legislature, the courts will be the next step. Then...
Many might consider it specious, but that does not negate the question. I was presuming it passed, as there is a good chance that liberals will figure out a way to do it.

I know that discussing it is premature, but I am genuinely curious what people think about how something so completely inane could be enforced if it were to pass. Which, as much as I hope not, may come to be.
__________________
--Magazines for Sig Sauer P6
--Walther P-38. Prefer Pre 1945
--Luger P08

Quote:
Originally Posted by ar15barrels View Post
Don't attempt to inject common sense into an internet pissing contest.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-27-2023, 5:38 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,493
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersapper View Post
...I know that discussing it is premature, but I am genuinely curious what people think about how something so completely inane could be enforced if it were to pass. Which, as much as I hope not, may come to be.
Probably much like San Francisco's ordinance; i.e., there are reasonable scenarios where Law Enforcement could become 'aware.' Such scenarios are viewed as a 'sufficient threat' to cause the vast majority to comply, especially if the 'fear of discovery and consequence' is greater than a direct 'fear' of the 'criminal circumstances' for which the firearm ostensibly exists. Let's just say that the 'best case scenario' you presented earlier is highly dependent upon jurisdiction and, in California, the jurisdictions are becoming fewer and fewer which are likely to assiduously adhere to such a scenario.

The bottom line is that we don't necessarily need to go through, once again, thoughts of 'jack booted thugs' going door-to-door to see if your guns/ammo are stored 'properly' according to ordinance vs. 'happenstance/incidental' discovery vs. 'loose lips sink ships' vs... Here's a 2022 thread... Legal Storage of Firearms At Home... where fiddletown and RickD427 provide a certain level of understanding regarding how such ordinances are interpreted.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-10-2023, 7:06 PM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 5,493
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Gun safety proposals take big step forward at Minnesota Legislature

Quote:
A pair of gun violence prevention measures long sought by Minnesota Democrats were added Wednesday to a broad public safety budget bill, significantly raising their chances of becoming law.

By unanimous voice votes, an all-Democratic House-Senate conference committee approved expanded background checks for gun transfers and a separate proposal for a "red flag law." It would allow authorities to obtain "extreme risk protection orders" to temporarily take guns away from people deemed to be an imminent threat to others or themselves.

But the gun measures still have a ways to go before they can become law. The conference committee had other work to complete on the package before sending it back to the full House and Senate. Lawmakers will then have to vote on the entire must-pass funding bill, which could make the choice easier to swallow for a handful of rural Democratic senators who have been on the fence. Democratic Gov. Tim Walz has pledged to sign it...
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-11-2023, 6:57 AM
Jimi Jah's Avatar
Jimi Jah Jimi Jah is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North San Diego County
Posts: 16,466
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

SC decisions are openly ignored. Welcome to Modern America.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:38 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy