The DFL Actually Is Coming For Your Guns

“Nobody’s coming for your guns”, liberals like to coo in a parental, condescending tone when pro-civil-rights Americans point out the inevitable end goal of “gun safety” legislation.

The best response to any of this is forcing them to read Linda Slocum’s gun grab bill – House File 3022 – which in its own way is far worse and more draconian than anything the DFL proposed in their 2013 orgy of legislation after Sandy Hook.

The bill, if passed into law, would:

  1. Make all your private data public, if you’re a gun owner; your home address as well as all the details of your carry permit.
  2. Require Minnesotans to get licenses for their firearms from their local chief of police – effectively turning Minneapolis and Saint Paul (and Inver Grove Heights, Maplewood and Chaska, by the way) into Chicago or the District of Columbia. And we know how well limiting civilian guns has worked there, don’t we?
  3. Making owning a suppressor – which just became legal in 2015 – a felony offense.
  4. Confiscating guns if you’re late on a child support payment.  That’s right – lose a job and fall a payment behind, have the cops swarming over your house on the command of your DFL-dues-paying local Child Support administrator.
  5. Ban all magazines over ten rounds. Yep – your classic Browining High Power is right out!  And by right out, we mean “You have to destroy any magazines of over ten rounds that you might own”.
  6. Raising the legal age to own – not buy –  firearms to 21.  Say goodbye to your high school trap shooting team.
  7. And, inevitably, an ” Assault Weapons” ban – with, of course, the unstated proviso that “Assault Weapon” means whatever a regulator wants it to mean.  It’s a provision that would have been too overreaching for a Soviet court to uphold.   You can grandfather any weapons you own (sans magazines over 10 rounds), but will be prohibited from giving, buying or transferring them to anyone else in any way, shape or form.   Got a couple of investment-grade pieces?  Wanna hand a couple down to your kids?  Sorry, citizen –  you own’t even be “allowed” to move them out of state.  You’ll have to destroy them oe hNS RHW.  Tough rocks, citizen.
  8. Finally – along with the licensing (which is also registration) comes the obligation to allow the cops to inspect your home storage.  Annually.

With this, the DFL has shown that they know who their enemy is.

It’s not street criminals or those who supply them guns – they’ll be unaffected by this bill.

It’s not even spree killers.

The DFL’s enemy is you, law-abiding gun owner.

Now, the GOP controls the Public Safety Committees in both chambers – so this bill will go nowhere.

This session.

But as Big Left pours money into the smear campaign against you, the law-abiding gun owner, they hope to change the electoral math in this state.  Next year could easily see a Minnesota House and Governor’s ofice controlled by Democrats, and a Senate with a one vote GOP majority led by Paul Gazelka, who passed on a chance to go to the mattresses for you  last year.

So if you’ve been sitting on your hands for the past few years because the goog guys have been beating the orcs back?   Sleepy time is over.

Renew your NRA membership.   Don’t like Wayne LaPierre’s public persona?  Either do I. . Hold your nose and do it anyway.

Renew – or start – your membership with the MN Gun Owners Caucus. And pony up a few extra bucks.   (And tell your gun owning friends to join the MNGOC, and not “Minnesota Gun Rights”.  The group appears to be a fund-raising charade that doesn’t actually spend any significant time or money moving the needle in Minnesota.  I think they’re frauds and I’ll tell them to their face.

And hold some PTO time aside.   We’re going to need to pack some hearing rooms.  Gone are the days when the good guys would outnumber the orcs 30-1;  all that Bloomberg money means professional “community organizers”, which means lots of warm, dumb bodies in orange t-shirts coming out to events.

When it comes to defending your second amendment rights, the only easy day was yesterday.

29 thoughts on “The DFL Actually Is Coming For Your Guns

  1. The plan to prove that Republicans are not completely in the pocket of the NRA is not working too well.

  2. Yeah, Emery, because it’s not like 40% of American households have guns, and certainly it’s not like most of them voted for Trump specifically because they knew that Hilliary would put an anti-gunner on the Supreme Court that would end the Heller and MacDonald precedents. Nope, gotta blame it all on the five million or so NRA members….and certainly we can’t bring to remembrance what happens when politicians ban guns and government goes bad. Nosirree…..

    Back to the subject, I would hope that someone in the DFL would be smart enough to pull Slocum aside and say “you know, if you want to get a DFL majority in either house this fall, you’ve got to stop doing stupid s**t like this.” But as it is, roll tape, this is what voting DFL will get you.

  3. The plan to prove that Republicans are not completely in the pocket of the NRA is not working too well.

    What does this mean? That, stripped of your innuendo, the Republican party and NRA agree on most, if not all issues regarding private gun ownership? Yeah, well, duh.

    I mean, by this argument, Democrats are completely in the pocket of the Brady Campaign or Planned Parenthood, yes?

  4. jdm,

    I think that you figured out Emery’s modus operandi. Prevent people from owning guns via Planned Parenthood: kill them before they are born.

  5. I mostly just lurk here.

    I just want to say I am a new 5 year member of the NRA and have also joined up with MNGOC. This bill cannot be allowed to pass.

  6. The plan to prove that Republicans Democrats are not completely in the pocket of the NRA Planned Parenthood, and all the other groups that outspend the NRA on contributions and lobbying is not working too well.

    Keep it coming, Emery.

  7. “8.16Subdivision 1. Ineligible persons.The following persons shall not be entitled to possess​8.17ammunition or a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon or, except for clause​8.18(1), any other firearm:


    10.16 (v) is an alien who is illegally or unlawfully in the United States”

    WAT? You…you…you mean that the undocumented can’t have the same rights as everyone else????? This will NEVER STAND!!

    You have to wonder how in the name of holy hell that line ever got in there.

  8. I am not completely in the NRA’s pocket. They are in mine.

    And I’m damned glad of it.

  9. This bill outlaws a semi-auto rifle with one prohibited feature, including: “a shroud attached to the barrel or that partially or completely encircles the barrel allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned . . .;”

    A Ruger 10-22, the most popular .22 rifle in all of history, accepts a detachable magazine and the stock extends under the barrel so you can hold the rifle without burning your non-trigger hand.

    It is an “assault weapon” under this law. A killing machine. Weapon of choice of mass-murderers. A menace to society, putting every schoolchild in grave peril. Thank God somebody finally proposed legislation to rid the state of this evil.

  10. Every single gun a good friend of mine owns, with the exception of a little .380 pocket carryi gun and a 12 gauge shotgun, is covered by one part of the bill or another.

  11. Let’s talk commas. It’s been a long time since English class but I seem to recall that a series of items separated by commas are separate examples that all relate to the final clause. Take out one or more examples and the rest still relate.

    An assault weapon is:

    (2) semiautomatic pistol, or any semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle with a fixed magazine, that has the capacity to accept more than seven rounds of ammunition.

    If we follow the rules of English, then the list can be removed and it now reads like this:

    (2) semiautomatic pistol . . . that has the capacity to accept more than seven rounds of ammunition.

    That Colt .45 ACP that Magnum PI used to carry? It has a seven round magazine BUT you can carry one in the chamber, for a total of eight. And you can buy fancy extended magazines holding even more. The fact those magazines are illegal is irrelevant: the pistol is CAPABLE of accepting them and therefore it’s a weapon of mass destruction whose sole purpose is killing large numbers of innocent children as rapidly as possible. Just like on the TV show.

  12. Pingback: In The Mailbox: 02.27.18 : The Other McCain

  13. I just hope that this gun control mania doesn’t distract the press from the Trump-Russia collusion story.
    And I hope that Mueller can keep his eye on the ball . . . steady, man, steady . . . you are almost there . . . One more indictment of a low level staffer no one has heard of on an unrelated charge might just switch the impeachment train into the station.

  14. Those of us who respect the Constitution insist these sorts of gun control measures aren’t seriously intended as public safety measures, but are merely a mechanism to impose the Liberal vision of society on a panicked public.

    The proof is in the bill: if you fall behind on your child support or alimony, the divorce court MUST order your firearms rights suspended.

    What the heck, seriously? When’s the last time a dad who got laid off, shot up a school? What possible connection exists between payment of alimony and the right to defend yourself from violent attack?

    None. There is no connection, no public safety purpose. That’s not the point of this law. It’s about power. It’s about control. It’s about forcing you to knuckle under.

  15. This bill covers any semi-automatic pistol that is capable of accepting a magazine holding more than 10 rounds.

    Every cop in Richfield (Rep. Slocum), New Brighton (Rep. Bernardy), Northfield (Rep. Bly), Apple Valley (Rep. Quade), Woodbury (Rep. Ward), Minnetonka (Rep. Applebaum) carries a 17-round Glock pistol or similar.

    Now that the legislature is poised to declare those pistols are assault weapons, deadly machines intended solely to kill as many people as possible, some constituents ought to ask the police chiefs in those towns why they feel the need to put such dangerous devices on the streets? After this law passes and their officers no longer face heavily armed criminals, will they pledge to go back to .38 Special revolvers? Won’t that be enough for officers to defend themselves?

  16. Plainly, some people haven’t read last year’s amendment to Minn. Stat. 518B.01, which provides:

    ” . . . the court shall order that the local law enforcement agency take immediate possession of all firearms . . . .”

    Last year, they came for guns from a few. I wasn’t one of them, so I didn’t object. This year, they’re proposing to come for guns from a few more. Wait – haven’t I heard this story before?

  17. Sorry to hear about your trouble up there.

    Maybe coddling stinking, reprobate leftists wasn’t such a good idea after all.

  18. Watch Hawaii.
    Hawaii has an extremely anti-gun political atmosphere. Everything the founders used to justify the second amendment did not happen here. Instead you had private armies, run by Americans, depose the beloved queen, annex the islands, and colonize them (that’s one very popular way of looking at it, anyhow).
    The guns I have were legally purchased after jumping through some flaming hoops of fire. They don’t make it easy.
    But for two years I have not been able to fire them legally. That’s when the last legal shooting range closed down. The county has now approved an area in the middle of nowhere for range shooting, but you have to have a hunting license to use it. They aren’t easy to get — you have to take two half day classes — and I don’t hunt & have no desire to do so. The two half day courses aren’t firearms safety, they are hunting specific courses.

  19. I just heard that the Democraps are using some obscure legislative rule to force a hearing on this! Rob Dorr will be on KTLK 1130 this morning to talk about it. Spread the word! We need to get rolling quickly!

  20. MBerg: Don’t fret so much. No one is going to take away your guns.

    This is coming from a troll whose every word is a lie. Carry on, cupcake.

  21. Pingback: An Inconvenient Bill | Shot in the Dark

  22. Pingback: 101 Reasons | Shot in the Dark

  23. Pingback: Misleading Advertising | Shot in the Dark

  24. Pingback: Conspiracy! | Shot in the Dark

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.