Does “knows” mean “has actual knowledge” or does it mean “didn’t have actual knowledge, but under the totality of the circumstances, after reasonable inquiry such as a background check, should have known and therefore is presumed to have known, so it’s okay to punish him as if he had actually known the buyer was prohibited.”
Joe Doakes
I think in this case it means “whatever an ambitious prosecutor with ambitions in the DFL wants it to mean.
That is a terribly written bill. It actually uses the word “knows” rather than “has reason to believe,” so it depends on state of mind.
Suppose you sell a weapon to a person who you believe is prohibited from owning a weapon, but you are wrong?
Or suppose you choose not to sell a weapon to a young black man because he looks like a guy you saw on TV who is a felon?