MPPA PASSES!

Within the past half hour, the Minnesota Senate passed the Minnesota Personal Protection Act - again.

The elected representatives of the people of Minnesota passed the bill by a 44-21 margin - seven votes more than in 2003, when the bill passed into law the first time.

The law was in full effect for 15 months in Minnesota, before a group of well-heeled suburban liberals led by former US Attorney David Lillehaug hijacked the law via a well-placed suit brought before a pet judge. The judge worded his ruling veeery carefully - to the point of sheer brilliance - which made the appeal a difficult (and ultimately unsuccessful) one.

Senator Pat Pariseau, and Concealed Carry Reform Now of Minnesota, did the right thing; rather than going straight to the legal system, like astroturf organizations like "Citizens for a Supine "Safer" Minnesota" do for these things, she/they did it the hard way, one vote at a time, the same way they got the original bill passed after eight years of fanatical resistance from the Metro DFL.

The right of criminals in Minnesota to practice their trade unmolested just took a big hit, again, today.

Thank God.

It's at this point that I have to give a shout-out to some not-so-usual suspects: the DFL.

No, not the metrocrats, like Wes "Lying Sack of Filth" Skoglund (averse as I am to namecalling, Skoglund is the exception; he's spent a decade slandering the law-abiding, honest gun owner, and earned my undying emnity), Jane Ranum and Matt Entenza. May their longstanding distrust, even slander, of the law-abiding be remembered for the rest of their political lives, if justice exists.

No, I'm talking about the DFL that represents the grass roots of this state, the outstate Senators that have more than a passing familiarity with common sense; the ones that can read numbers, like "in fifteen months, the MPPA recorded no problems, at at least one crime deterred that was directly attributable to an MPPA; like 28 states have passed Shall Issue laws in the past 22 years, and none have repealed them (outside of the odd legal challenge in New Mexico, Missouri and here); that such laws have been an unmitigated success everywhere they've been tried.

25 months ago, when the bill first passed into law, and awash in long-denied joy at what I'd believed nearly impossible only five years before, I quoted at full length the lyrics of Bob Dylan's "Chimes of Freedom". Overzealous? Irrational exuberance? Certainly.

I think we've all earned it.

Especially Pat Pariseau, for whom my mere "thanks" seems hardly enough. She is a profile in political courage, and a case study in raw perseverence. God Bless Pat Pariseau.

UPDATE: First major media coverage (that I could find): Patrick Condon of the Associated Press, whose wrapup of the debate practically oozes sorrow, and sympathy for the metrocrats; I've added the emphases:

Gun control advocates in the Senate got an opportunity they were denied two years ago, as they tried - but ultimately failed - to set stricter limits on who can carry a handgun in public as their fellow lawmakers voted to revive a court-overturned 2003 gun permit law.

"I will not be silenced on this bill and I will not hesitate to point out what a terrible bill it is," said Sen. Wes Skoglund, DFL-Minneapolis, even as a bipartisan group of senators methodically rejected multiple efforts to create more gun-free zones, limits on who can carry guns and deeper background checks on permit applicants.

After hours of debate the Senate voted 44-21 for the handgun bill, a duplicate of the 2003 act that courts struck down because of the flawed method lawmakers used to pass it. At the time, supporters of the bill attached it to an unrelated measure, robbing opponents of the chance to make changes they sought.

Is Mr. Condon ignorant, or is he biased?

These and other questions as we continue.

Posted by Mitch at May 13, 2005 05:43 PM | TrackBack