{"id":19386,"date":"2011-04-18T07:45:38","date_gmt":"2011-04-18T13:45:38","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=19386"},"modified":"2011-04-18T08:46:27","modified_gmt":"2011-04-18T14:46:27","slug":"toward-human-rights","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=19386","title":{"rendered":"Toward Human Rights"},"content":{"rendered":"

I was one of the people eight years ago who rejoiced when a bipartisan <\/em>sampling of Minnesota Reps and Senators passed the Minnesota Personal Protection Act.<\/p>\n

Over the frenzied, and often incoherent, objections of the Metro Left and Media (pardon the redundancy), Republicans joined with commonsense outstate DFLers to affirm Minnesotans’ human right<\/em> to self-defense, allowing demonastrably law-abiding, sane, unimpaired, trained Minnesotans to carry firearms for their and their family’s protection.\u00a0 And the next year, when a DFL lapdog with a “judge” title scuppered the law with a frankly incoherent court decision, an even bigger group of legislators passed it into law again<\/em>.<\/p>\n

They were both wondrous days.<\/p>\n

But there was a huge hole in the law; while the law removed the government’s discretion from issuing carry permits, it retained shocking amount of it in determining what “self-defense” was.\u00a0 A Minnesotan who determines, literally as a matter of life and death, to use lethal force in self-defense can have his motives, and his compliance with the county attorney’s interpretation of the “Duty To Retreat” (of which there are 87 varieties in Minnesota, one for each county attorney) analyzed by someone who has all the time in the world to make up his or her mind any way he or she wants.<\/p>\n

Today, we made the first step on the j0urney to fix all that.\u00a0 Rep. Tony Cornish of Good Thunder introduced HF1497 <\/a>last Friday. \u00a0 And it makes some absolutely vital <\/em>changes to Minnesota law:<\/p>\n