shotbanner.jpeg

May 13, 2005

MPPA Passes - Redux

Joel Rosenberg was at the Senate today, and passed commentary out to his blog via phone. I couldn't read the posts as they happened - my employer blocks LiveJournal - but I've been catching up.

A couple of points:

Senator Dean Johnson's aide came out, after that, and rather imperially demanded that we send our thanks to the Senator for keeping his word. I think that's only fair -- you'll find him at 651.296.3826, or right here. Please do call and email him; I just did, myself.
I just left a message, thanking Johnson and all outstate DFLers.

There's some really good news:

The Senate removed all of the silly amendments that came out of Skogie's Crime committee. No fingerprinting; no governments telling you that you can't protect yourself in a park; the same reasonable alcohol limit that we had no trouble living with. A whole barrage of silly amendments were voted down, and a couple passed that were just plain repetitive. (New language repeats the existing language that you've got to show your permit to a cop who asks to see it; it's ambiguous as to what -- if anything -- the penalty might be if you don't, say, because you've left your permit and your handgun at home. Not to worry.)
It could be worse.

Of course, there are reasons to be cautious:

The only thing I'm concerned about -- and we'll be discussing this, at length, over the next few days -- are the implications of letting the DPS be the gatekeeper for civilian carry permit training. On the good side, their validation system has been working quite well; on the minus side, one of the reasons it's been working is that NRA- or AACFI-certified instructors weren't required to submit to it. All in all, I think this is a definite win.
As Joel points out, it was a bigger win than even some of the more exuberant among us had hoped for - 44 votes. Joel predicted 43; my own semi-informed count said 40 or so. The 2003 vote was 37 in favor; 34 were needed to pass.

Best part? It's better than 2-1 in favor. I'd call that a mandate.

The House is next. It should be less of a white-knuckle ride.

Posted by Mitch at May 13, 2005 07:09 PM | TrackBack
Comments

I'm breathing again.

Did you forget the links to Joel, or was this an email? I've been forgetting, myself, to keep up with Minnesota issues of late, so I don't have that link myself.

Posted by: Old Whig at May 14, 2005 01:46 AM

Oh, I see the quick link to Joel in the comments on the next post.

Posted by: Old Whig at May 14, 2005 02:05 AM

That notification provision isn't entirely redundent.

The original language required you to carry your permit and ID when you were carrying your gun, and to show permit and ID to any LEO who asked.

The added language requires you to answer whether or not you are carrying a gun to any LEO who asks.

This makes it the second positive imposition of the MCPPA on permit carriers who decide not to carry. (If you get a permit, then decide not to use it, what burdens does it impose? You have to inform the issuing sheriff every time you change addresses. And now you have to answer when a police officer asks you if you have a gun.)

Posted by: jdege at May 14, 2005 11:45 AM
hi