To: Governor Walz
You – or one of your social media smurfs – tweeted this over the weekend:
I caught the subtle gaslighting; in Democrat communications lately, upporting your current flavor is “courage“. I’m sure that will log roll at least a couple of gullible people who don’t think that hard.
But since The laws we already have, against straw purchases and trafficking guns to known felons, and using guns to commit crimes, and for that matter shooting up a car with your family in it, aren’t being enforced in cities run by your party, how about you have the “bravery“ to do the executive branches enumerated job, and enforce the laws we already have?
It’s a little harder than gaslighting the Republican majority in the Senate and a state full of gun owners, but it is your job.
Or lieutenant governor Flanagan‘s job, anyway.
That is all.
Yea, it looks like a few RINO traitors in the Senate, are willing to cave in to the DemoCommies on gun grabbing. Four of them are retiring and the rest have 2-4 years before they face reelection, banking on their constituents having short memories.
FIFY. [H]ow about you have the “bravery“ to do the executive branches enumerated job, nominate judges who put criminals in jail, and enforce the laws we already have?
Sorry! The U.S. Senate.
boss, I’m sure there’s a RINO traitor or two in the MN Senate who would be happy to cave to the DemoCommies on gun grabbing.
I know that I am not supposed to ask questions like this, but why is a school shooting in TX considered a valid reason to change national firearms laws?
One of the interesting cross currents here is that the compromise senate law can be seen as labeling people with mental illness as potentially violent, and that doesn’t sit well with parts of the Dem base.
We’ve seen this pattern before. A bipartisan group of senators manages to reach the 60 senate vote barrier by agreeing on broad principles. When they try to finalize the language, the numbers drop, or “final language could not be agreed upon.” I see problems with the proposal already.
jdm.
Yea, I wasn’t discounting that factor. In fact, I’m a little concerned about Scott Jensen and Warren Limmer. They both have seemed to waffle over the last couple of years.
They changed the chanting point language again. Now it’s “gun safety.”
My guns are perfectly safe. They’re at the bottom of that lake, after the tragic canoe accident a few years back. I visit them, sometimes, floating above their watery graves, but it’s not the same.
Joe;
And I’m sure that even if you retrieved them, the damage from the exposure to the water, would make them both inoperable and unrestorable.
The senate compromise plan has hit another obstacle. It calls for an examination of juvenile criminal records before an 18-21 year old is permitted to buy a firearm.
It seems that the usual ethnic minorities would suffer disproportionately under this scheme.
It’s worth noting, regarding the examination of juvenile criminal records, that neither the Uvalde shooter nor the Buffalo shooter had that. Might be a good idea, but maybe sit down and discuss/debate it before “act in haste, repent at leisure”?