HELP! We need a rational response to this, but they aren't rational!

[Kiffster]

I can barely type because of the fury shaking my fingers. I just finished reading an editorial in the Red Star paper(Star Tribune) from Minneapolis, MN. I can't do it justice, so read it for yourself:

Editorial: Hidden guns
Do we really want more of them around?

Wednesday, April 18, 2001

So you're watching a game at the Metrodome next fall, and the guy next to you is downing his fourth beer of the first half. You can just tell he's not your sort of fellow, but you don't know the half of it: He's got two DWIs on his record and a history of barroom dust-ups. When he lived up north a few years back, he was convicted of shoving his son's teacher, shouting obscenities on a street corner, kicking a cop and pointing a gun at his neighbor. He's also notoriously nasty to his wife -- though his many arrests for knocking her around have never led to a conviction.

You don't know any of this, of course, and perhaps you'd rather not. But there's something else you don't know about your less-than-charming seatmate: He's carrying a loaded gun. He's carrying it legally -- because nothing he's done was terrible enough or recent enough to keep him from qualifying for a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Are you OK with that? Then you'll feel fine about the concealed-weapons bill now steaming through the Legislature. It could help bring this unseemly scenario to life. It would allow almost any Minnesotan to carry a loaded, hidden gun. Hailed by the governor and approved by the House last week, the measure is just one procedural maneuver away from passage in the Senate.

This prospect should alarm Minnesotans, and should spur them to pick up the phone. They can't possibly want tens of thousands of people packing pistols in public. Yet that's just what this bill would allow. It would strip police chiefs of the discretion they now exercise in granting permits to carry concealed weapons. It would entitle almost anyone over 21 to a permit. Convicted felons would still be barred from carrying guns, as would people who've been committed to psychiatric hospitals.

But beyond those and a few other such limits, the sky's pretty much the limit. Police chiefs would be obliged to issue carrying permits to people convicted of all sorts of gross misdemeanors -- including assault, indecent exposure, reckless use of a gun and more than 100 other crimes. They couldn't say no even to a permit applicant exhibiting blatant and worrisome signs of mental illness. Neither could they deny permits to applicants from out of state -- despite the profound difficulty in checking nonresidents' backgrounds.

Where's the logic in such a scheme -- and where's the benefit? Backers of the bill speak fondly of its potential to enhance public safety. But how can a fresh flock of concealed weapons in public places keep people safe -- especially when drunken drivers and other skunks are welcome in the gun-toting throng?

More likely this bill will enhance the possibility of public shootouts, spur-of-the-moment suicides and lethal love spats in local restaurants. Even if those tragedies are avoided, there's another reason to worry about this bill: More loaded guns in more pockets means more weapons within reach of small hands.

Who can support such an idea? Surely no thoughtful state senator will. Minnesotans should call Senate Majority Leader Roger Moe (651-296-2577 or [email protected]) and Senate President Don Samuelson (651-296-4875 or [email protected]) to express dismay about the concealed-weapons plan. They should call their state senators to say the same thing. The Senate must kill this dangerous bill.


****************************************************

I think we need to show them who the rational people are in this arguement with thousands of rational, reasoned responses to these legislators. Phone calls are best, but e-mail is something. Remember to be nice, we are the rational ones wanting the bill passed. As for a letters to the paper, same rules apply, but they need to also hear from us.(notice they don't give an author) Contact page is here:
http://www.startribune.com/st/qview....story=70746486

I'll list a bunch of other Senators to call or write(the house is with us):

The bill number to refer to is HF1360, and it is called the "Minnesota Personal Protection Act".

There are a number of rural DFL Senator with A grades and a N vote that need to be called or written. I Have marked there Name with an *. My apologies as to the layout of the chart below. The header just below indicates the order of data. For vote Y/N/P read Y - in favor, N- not in favor, P = absent.

Senator's Name - vote Y/N/P - Party - CCRN grade - District - Office - Phone - e-mail

Lessard, Bob Y (I) A 3 G-51 Capitol (651) 296-4136 [email protected]
Bachmann, Michele Y (R) A 56 125 SOB (651) 296-4351 [email protected]
Dille, Steve Y (R) A 20 103 SOB (651) 296-4131 [email protected]
Frederickson, Dennis Y (R) A 23 139 SOB (651) 296-8138 [email protected]
Johnson, Debbie J. Y (R) A 50 149 SOB (651) 296-3219 [email protected]
Kleis, Dave Y (R) A 16 107 SOB (651) 296-6455 [email protected]
Larson, Cal Y (R) A 10 153 SOB (651) 296-5655 [email protected]
Lesewski, Arlene J. Y (R) A 21 131 SOB (651) 296-4125 [email protected]
Limmer, Warren Y (R) A 33 121 SOB (651) 296-2159 [email protected]
Neuville, Thomas M. Y (R) A 25 123 SOB (651) 296-1279 [email protected]
Olson, Gen Y (R) A 34 119 SOB (651) 296-1282 [email protected]
Ourada, Mark Y (R) A 19 145 SOB (651) 296-5981 [email protected]
Reiter, Mady Y (R) A 53 155 SOB (651) 296-1253 [email protected]
Scheevel, Kenric J. Y (R) A 31 129 SOB (651) 296-3903 [email protected]
Schwab, Grace S. Y (R) A 27 151 SOB (651) 296-9248 [email protected]
Stevens, Dan Y (R) A 17 105 SOB (651) 296-8075 [email protected]
Kierlin, Bob Y (R) A 32 127 SOB (651) 296-5649 [email protected]
Pariseau, Pat Y (R) A+ 37 109 SOB (651) 296-5252 [email protected]
Day, Dick Y (R) B 28 147 SOB (651) 296-9457 [email protected]
Knutson, David L. Y (R) B 36 133 SOB (651) 296-4120 [email protected]
Kiscaden, Sheila M. Y (R) C 30 135 SOB (651) 296-4848 [email protected]
Robling, Claire A. Y (R) C 35 143 SOB (651) 296-4123 [email protected]
Belanger, William V. Y (R) F 41 113 SOB (651) 296-5975 [email protected]
Berglin, Linda P (DFL) F 61 309 Capitol (651) 296-4261 [email protected]
* Krentz, Jane P (DFL) F 51 111 Capitol (651) 296-7061 [email protected]
Berg, Charles A. P (R) A 13G-25 SOB (651) 296-5094 [email protected]
Fischbach, Michelle L. P (R) A 14 G- 15 SOB (651) 296-2084 [email protected]
Foley, Leo T. N (DFL) ? 49 G-24 Capitol (651) 296-4154 [email protected]
* Fowler, Chuck N (DFL) ? 26 G-9 Capitol (651) 296-5713 [email protected]
* Kinkel, Anthony G. "Tony" N (DFL) ? 4 G-9 Capitol (651) 296-4913 [email protected]
Sabo, Julie A. N (DFL) ? 62 317 Capitol (651) 296-4274 [email protected]
* Tomassoni, David J. N (DFL) ? 5 111 Capitol (651) 296-8017 [email protected]
* Johnson, David H. N (DFL) A 40 124 Capitol (651) 296-9261 [email protected]
* Johnson, Douglas J. N (DFL) A 6 205 Capitol (651) 296-8881 [email protected]
* Langseth, Keith N (DFL) A 9 122 Capitol (651) 296-3205 [email protected]
* Metzen, James P. N (DFL) A 39 322 Capitol (651) 296-4370 [email protected]
* Sams, Dallas C. N (DFL) A 11 328 Capitol (651) 297-8063 [email protected]
* Samuelson, Don N (DFL) A 12 120 Capitol (651) 296-4875 [email protected]
* Scheid, Linda N (DFL) A 47 303 Capitol (651) 296-8869 [email protected]
* Vickerman, Jim N (DFL) A 22 226 Capitol (651) 296-5650 [email protected]
* Wiger, Charles W. N (DFL) A 55 301 Capitol (651) 296-6820 [email protected]
* Lourey, Becky N (DFL) B 8 G-9 Capitol (651) 296-0293 [email protected]
Johnson, Dean E. N (DFL) D 15 124B Capitol (651) 296-3826 [email protected]
Murphy, Steve N (DFL) D 29 306 Capitol (651) 296-4264 [email protected]
Solon, Sam G. N (DFL) D 7 303 Capitol (651) 296-4188 sen.sam/[email protected]
Stumpf, LeRoy A. N (DFL) D 1 G-24 Capitol (651) 296-8660 [email protected]
Anderson, Ellen R. N (DFL) F 66 120 Capitol (651) 296-5537 [email protected]
Betzold, Don N (DFL) F 48 G-9 Capitol (651) 296-2556 [email protected]
Chaudhary, Satveer N (DFL) F 52 325 Capitol (651) 296-4334 [email protected]
Cohen, Richard J. N (DFL) F 64 317 Capitol (651) 296-5931 [email protected]
Higgins, Linda N (DFL) F 58 328 Capitol (651) 296-9246 [email protected]
Hottinger, John C. N (DFL) F 24 205 Capitol (651) 296-6153 [email protected]
Kelley, Steve N (DFL) F 44 321 Capitol (651) 297-8065 [email protected]
Kelly, Randy C. N (DFL) F 67 323 Capitol (651) 296-5285 [email protected]
Marty, John N (DFL) F 54 325 Capitol (651) 296-5645 [email protected]
Moe, Roger D. N (DFL) F 2 208 Capitol (651) 296-2577 [email protected]
Orfield, Myron N (DFL) F 60 227 Capitol (651) 296-4191 [email protected]
Pappas, Sandra L. N (DFL) F 65 120 Capitol (651) 296-1802 [email protected]
Pogemiller, Lawrence J. N (DFL) F 59 235 Capitol (651) 296-7809 [email protected]
Price, Leonard R. N (DFL) F 57 235 Capitol (651) 297-8060 [email protected]
Ranum, Jane B. N (DFL) F 63 120 Capitol (651) 297-8061 [email protected]
Rest, Ann H. Rest N (DFL) F 46 G-24 Capitol (651) 296-2889 [email protected]
Ring, Twyla N (DFL) F 18 306 Capitol (651) 296-5419 [email protected]
Wiener, Deanna L. N (DFL) F 38 303 Capitol (651) 297-8073 [email protected]
Robertson, Martha R. N (R) B 45 141 SOB (651) 296-4314 [email protected]
Terwilliger, Roy N (R) D 42 115 SOB (651) 296-6238 [email protected]
Oliver, Edward C. N (R) F 43 117 SOB (651) 296-4837 [email protected]

Thanks!!!

Kiffster

[Fuzzy]

I lived in Minesota for a year and that's about what I would expect from the newspapers up there. I remember reading one article saying that Minnesota should leave the US and join Canada because, as far as I could tell, Missenota was too "progressive" (read that as socialist) for the US.

I left that state just as soon as my contract was up.

-Fuzzy

[Paul K]

Where i live (MI)
It is illeagel to carry in a stadium. It is also illeagel to own a gun after you have a felony.

This stuff makes me really, really mad.

[USP45]

The response to this one is simple.

To the Editor,

I feel I must take a few moments to respond to your opinions contained in,
"Hidden Guns" (04/18/2001). Lets look closer at your example of the
drunk at the ball game with his 4th beer before the end of the half.

First of all, NO he is NOT carrying a hidden gun legally. If he is drinking
alcohol while carrying a firearm, he is committing a crime. In most states
it is a crime punishable by a prison term, or atleast a stiff fine and loss of
license. This fellow is not a law abiding citizen. This guy would have been
carrying his gun anyway. CCW laws wouldn't affect him at all. He's already
shown that he has no respect for the law, and would violate it at a whim.
The simple truth is that he would be carrying a concealed gun with or
without a permit.

You already give the police a firearm so that the next time this drunk tries
to kick him to the ground, he can protect himself. Why not give this drunk's
son's school teacher the right to carry a weapon so he doesn't have to be
beaten up by this drunk who isn't going to obey the law anyway?

Why not give the bar owner the right to carry a weapon so that the next
time this drunk decides he's going to beat the life out of a patron, he can stop
the assault?

Why not give his neighbor the right to carry a weapon so that the next time
this drunk decides he's going to threaten the life of an innocent, that innocent
can defend his life?

Why don't you put him in jail for his DUIs? Why don't you put him in jail for
assaulting the Teacher, or the Police Officer? Why don't you put him in jail for
continuously engaging in violence at public businesses? Why isn't he in jail
for threatening the life of his neighbor?

Sounds to me like you are protecting the criminal at the expense of the
citizen. Pretty typical shallow logic from the gun control crowd.

Three-Quarters of the States allow the carrying of concealed firearms; yes,
even here in Massachusetts, with the toughest gunlaws in the country, you can
obtain a license to carry a concealed weapon for your protection. Perhaps your state
should become more progressive and join the rest of us in allowing your lawful
citizens the right and ability to protect themselves from the criminal element of
society?

Sincerely,

[Wallew]

Here's the email I sent the two Senators listed in the article :
--
Sirs,
As you are no doubt aware, issuance of Concealed Carry licenses has the tendency to drop all forms of crime by somewhere in the neighborhood of about thirty percent. THOSE ARE THE FACTS. Look them up yourself. Or call John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime".

On the other side of the fight, all they can come up with are scary scenarios that NEVER, EVER HAPPEN.

Here is just one example of the scare tactics being put forth by those who oppose a persons right to self defense, and worse OH MY GOD, they will be held responsible for their own actions. A LIBERALS WORST NIGHTMARE. Someone who is willing to protect life and limb without having to dial 911 until it's all over. Now that must really FRIGHTEN THE BEJESUS out of every liberal in your state.

Here is the scare tactics of the liberal left (easily read in full screen):

--
And here is the email I sent to the Star Tribune's Opinion email address:

--
In response to your Editorial "Hidden Guns: Do we want more of them around". The answer of any sane person is YES! I find it interesting that your company didn't have the GUTS to name the writer of the article. What's the matter? You can dish it out, but afraid of a little direct email response??? That's fairly typical of a leftist liberal. Just like the fact the every liberal I've ever met says being responsible for your own actions is a bad thing. After all, there is always a reason why a person is not to blame for their own acts. At least according to the leftist liberals.

And the sad/funny part is, you've already lost the CCW fight, so the only avenue left to you is to try and SCARE PEOPLE WITH LIES. I know, I know, you don't ACTUALLY LIE, you just destort the truth to such a degree that all the other leftist liberals will whine, moan and pull their hair out. Guess what? Every reasonable, sane thinking person KNOWS that giving HONEST CIVILIANS the right to protect themselves against BAD GUYS lessens the leftist liberals sway over them. They are no longer dependant upon the government to provide for their saftey. And guess what?? The people who get those CCW permits WILL be held responsible for their actions if they MISUSE their firearm.

So no, "Blood won't run in the streets" and "There won't be people getting into gun battles over little league games or parking spots" as has been claimed in several states as the leftist liberals tried every DIRTY TRICK in the book trying to get the Concealed Carry permit bill to keep from being passed in their state.

I know you won't print this letter, because it's from someone OUTSIDE your state AND it's a progun statement. But then, it won't matter BECAUSE the left has already lost this fight.

BWAAA HAA HAA HAA!!!!

See ya around. Only once this bill has passed into law, you and your leftist friends will be so much safer and CRIME will drop by about one third. SO, despite all your whining, moaning and complaining about this issue, you WILL LOSE and Minnesota will be safer, regardless of WHAT YOU BELIEVE.

--
Don't just sit back and complain about this here. Write these people snail mail letter. Email them. Call them. Do everything you can to get this passed. YOU WON'T BE DISAPPOINTED.


USP45 - well written. However, trying to respond to a 'what if' scenario is a waste of time. For every 'what if' they can come up with, I can give them one hundred examples of an honest citizen protecting him or her self, OR coming to the aid of someone in trouble, even an occaisional police officer who needed help and got it from an honest citizen. Bravo and WELL DONE!

[tc556guy]

I'm all for shall-issue CCW, but if they're right that convictions for things are assault are not grounds for denial of a Minn. CCW, then the bill needs to be re-worked.

[Kiffster]

Thanks for the responses. We are SO close to this passing in MN, which is unbelievable in itself, and have the votes to even pass the DFL controlled Senate, but they won't let it up for a vote! Makes me mad, but at least we have a record to present to the public in certain districts for the next election. Some of those who are fighting us may not be back next session.

There is an answer for the assault convictions, which is that the police can refuse a permit for a pattern of criminal conduct. I don't have the wording in front of me, but the thug in question would have been refused because of his recent past offences.

Kiffster

[USP45]

Kiffster,

Unfortunately we don't want people rejected for a CCW license, we want them in jail. If they're not responsible to carry a gun, they should be behind bars.