Friday, May 13, 2005

WCCO TV news made this story an issue about licensing to carry a firearm

This story, I mean. I see the issue isn't raised in this article.

Earlier in the week Channel 9's "FOX 9 Investigors" presented this bit of news:
In the interest of public safety, you don't want a mentally unstable person getting a gun, much less a permit to go and buy one.

It’s already happened at least once, with deadly consequences.

The question is will a flaw we found in the system allow it to happen again?

Both pieces failed to ask crucial questions.

First: as I understand it, you don't need a permit in Minnesota to buy a handgun. You need a permit to carry a concealed handgun. You can't carry one openly unless you're a cop. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe rent-a-cops can get a license to carry openly on the job.

Second: the reformed "Shall Issue" law has been struck down by the State Supreme Court since February. That law said that if you weren't mentally ill, nor a convicted felon, you shall be issued a license to carry a concealed weapon if you asked for one. It was struck down because a few liberal churches contested some fine points in the restrictions. And a goofy grammar flaw that the politicians and lawyers didn't catch. [And you wonder why I hate them. Blatantly frickin' obvious to anyone with two weeks of logic instruction under his or her belt!]

Permits were issued under that law for about 6 months [correction: it was 15 months] before a court struck it down. [Apparently, even its opponents were logical morons.] I believe those permits are still in effect, but I notice that neither of these articles ask the question, "under which regime were these permits issued?" The old (and current) regime allows police chiefs and county sheriffs to issue permits to carry concealed firearms (I reiterate: permits to buy any kind of gun are not required, though registration is) at their own discretion. Some of them licensed nearly anyone who asked (I know of some real doozies in St. Louis County), and, particularly in the Twin Cities Metro area, some would license very few, close comrades.

I'd bet that neither of these people should have been issued concealed carry permits under either regime, but the MSM didn't ask.

I grew up in a place where there were few directions (which were made very clear to me by both of my parents - as I understood it, on pain of death, at either of their hands) in which I could not unload my semi-automatic .22 safely. Or, for that matter, fire off any kind of firework I wanted, although all fireworks beyond sparklers were illegal. (We lived in the Wild West of Douglas County, Wisconsin.)

I'm sayin': I learned from a very early age, that you don't go shootin' a firearm where an innocent person might get hurt. It would be a tragedy beyond words if an innocent person were killed. I understood.

Guilty people were another matter: if you catch somebody red-handed trying to hurt someone, they're fair game.

Oh! I forgot to mention that the Minnesota Personal Protection Act has been amended and is up for debate this week. My buddy (whom I haven't met as yet) Mitch is on the case.

[And another correction: the MPPA creates a 'shall issue' permit to carry. There is nothing about concealment in the law. It passed the MN Senate with flying colors. It'll pass the Republican-dominated House even easier, and Gov. Pawlenty will sign it.]

No comments: