HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016 04-27 Gun control bills get a big crowd, but little action likely PIONEER PRESS4/27/2016 Pioneer Press - Gun control bills get a big crowd, but little action likely
Gun control bills get a big crowd, but little action likely
By: TAD VEZNER I tvezner@pioneerpress.com
April 27, 2016
A state Senate hearing room's ample seat capacity proved barely adequate Tuesday as lawmakers
received a double earful of input on a pair of gun control bills introduced — but unlikely to pass — this
year
Police chiefs and gun control advocates called the bills common-sense safety measures that would save
lives, while those opposed said they would do little but create added fees and were a step on a "slippery
slope" toward draconian government oversight.
Sen. Ron Latz, DFL -St. Louis Park, chairs the judiciary committee and sponsored both bills. He
acknowledged during the hearing that neither bill stood a chance this year, given opposition to any gun
control measures in the Republican -controlled House. In turn, opponents called the hearing —
coinciding with a rally of hundreds of gun control advocates at the Capitol Tuesday — planned political
theater.
But Latz said regardless of the bills' fate this year, it was important to continue discussion on the issue.
CLOSING LOOPHOLE
Latz's first bill, calling for universal background checks for all gun buyers, closes a "loophole" for gun
show sales and intrastate sales online, using platforms such as Craigslist and Armslist — which currently
require no background check. The bill has some exceptions, such as exchanges between immediate
family members.
If neither the buyer nor seller is a federally licensed dealer, they're both required to appear before one;
that dealer is then required to conduct the check, and fill out and keep a record of the transaction on a
federal form.
New Hope Police Chief Tim Fournier — the first to testify — presented the case of Ra mond Kmetz, who
last year entered New Hope's city hall and fired a shotgun, injuring an officer before being fatally shot
himself.
But Fournier was challenged by Rep. Scott Newman, R -Hutchinson, over whether a background check
bill would have made any difference, given that the person who bought Kmetz's guns — a "straw buyer'
— could have passed a check anyway.
Several testifiers referenced a study conducted by Everytown for Gun Safety, using data from the
Centers for Disease Control and the FBI, that found 46 percent fewer women are shot by intimate
http://www.twi nciti es.com/2016/04/27/gun-control-bi I Is-get-a-bi g -crowd -but -I ittl e -action -I i kely/ 1/3
4/27/2016 Pioneer Press - Gun control bills get a big crowd, but little action likely
partners in states where background checks had passed, and 48 percent fewer law enforcement officers
shot.
Gun rights advocates noted there has yet to be statistics presented on whether all incidents in those
categories decreased — whether, for example, domestic violence rates decreased overall, as opposed
to just those related to guns — the argument being that a switch in the method solved nothing.
Gun rights advocates also pointed to fees — in one instance, $50 for a background check — that would
be incurred by private gun buyers.
After hearing much of the testimony, Sen. Kathy Sheran, DFL -Mankato, replied that "I just find the
arguments (by gun rights advocates) really failing to understand or acknowledge the underbelly that
occurs here — what guns are capable of doing."
Rep. Barb Goodwin, DFL -Columbia Heights, flat-out asked opponents what they were afraid of.
"I'm afraid of you," gun rights advocate Richard Dian replied during public testimony, prompting the
session's sole round of public applause. "This is another centimeter of movement away from the
Constitution."
Latz replied that the constitutionality of background checks have already been established by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
PROTECTION ORDERS
Latz's second bill was also met with skepticism by some gun rights advocates.
The bill aims to create a "gun violence protective order," which would prevent an individual from
possessing a gun based on a petition from family members or police.
It would require proof as to why the subject of the order "poses a significant danger of bodily injury to
self or to other persons by possessing a firearm," and why other alternatives wouldn't work.
Proponents said the bill would allow families a means to protect their loved ones from what they believed
to be clear and present dangers, while some gun rights advocates said it was ripe for abuse, and made
property seizures uncomfortably easy.
The basis of such an order could be based on a subject's history of threats or violence, or the "reckless
use, display, or brandishing" of a gun.
Prior felony arrests would be considered, even if there was no conviction. As for convictions, judges
could consider violent misdemeanors, or drug- and alcohol-related offenses if there was evidence the
individual was not recovering.
http://www.twi nciti es.com/2016/04/27/gun-control-bi I Is-get-a-bi g -crowd -but -I ittl e -action -I i kely/ 2/3
4/27/2016 Pioneer Press - Gun control bills get a big crowd, but little action likely
If the order is granted, the individual would have to transfer his or her guns to a licensed dealer or law
enforcement agency, who could charge a fee for storage. The order would last between six months and
two years, but could be extended, and violating it would be a misdemeanor.
Of particular concern to gun rights advocates was the fact that a separate emergency order could also
be issued "ex -parte," meaning the subject would not be required to be present to fight it. Such an order
could last only for two weeks, rather than months, and the subject could demand a later hearing to
challenge it.
Maplewood Police Chief Paul Schnell, speaking on behalf of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association
in favor of the bill, said such orders were meant to be rare and short-term, giving people "an opportunity
to stabilize," rather than a more restrictive civil commitment order.
COMMON GROUND
By the end of the session, Latz declared that some common ground had been established. In one
instance, Joe Olson, chair of the Minnesota Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance, said he would personally
support a background check as long as it didn't link to — or record — specific information about gun
sales.
But Latz's counterpart in the House, Rep. Tony Cornish, R -Vernon Center, who chairs the public safety
committee, reiterated this week that no gun bill will be heard in his committee this session.
Rep. Tony Cornish, R- Vernon Center. (Courtesy photo)
"This is a dog and pony show that everybody knows is going nowhere," Cornish said. "If there was a gun
hearing, it would be defeated on the (House) floor with Democratic votes."
Earlier this week, Americans for Responsible Solutions — a gun control advocacy group founded in part
by former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords — released the results of a telephone poll of 600
registered Minnesotan voters, asking whether respondents "favor or oppose requiring criminal
background checks on all gun sales, including those sold online and at gun shows."
The poll found that 73 percent "strongly favored" the idea statewide, including 56 percent of Republicans
polled. Another 13 percent of all statewide respondents "somewhat favored" the idea.
But an online survey conducted this year by the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus of 891 gun owners
randomly selected from their mailing list found that 80.4 percent were "strongly opposed" to legislation
requiring "universal background checks required for most firearms transfers," with another 11.4 percent
"opposed."
http://www.twi nciti es.com/2016/04/27/gun-control-bi I Is-get-a-bi g -crowd -but -I ittl e -action -I i kely/ 3/3