Good and bad news for MN CCW


PDA






nonquixote
May 14, 2005, 12:16 PM
The good news is that the MNPPA ver2 passed the senate in an acceptable form. This was expected to be its most difficult hurdle and passage in the house was considered a given.

Now the bad news. Unfortunately the Antis now have a real case to use against us in the future. It seems that the dip---- who shot and killed the doorman at Nye's in Minneapolis was a drunken CCL holder. Batten down the hatches.

Nonq

If you enjoyed reading about "Good and bad news for MN CCW" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
goalie
May 14, 2005, 12:29 PM
I heard that the guy had a criminal and mental health history. That would mean the LE agency that issued the permit screwed up, wouldn't it?

PowderBurn
May 17, 2005, 02:16 PM
Interesting how the Star and Sickle didn't include that minor fact in their front page article....assuming it is a fact. I hadn't heard it yet. It's just the kind of thing they'd omit, though.

halvey
May 17, 2005, 02:37 PM
Well, this is my argument:
of the millions of nationwide CCW holders, there has been only a handful of problems. This guy wasn't carrying. He went and got his gun either at his house or his car. Permit or not, this would have happened anyway.

Of course the situations where a CCW came in handy in MN weren't really reported either.

I put this in a letter to the editor, so hopefully they'll print it. And hopefully this won't effect the House.

edited: Here's my letter to the Strib
---------------------
According to FBI reports, states that allow citizens the right to defend themselves, total violent crime is 13% lower, homicide is 3% lower and assault is 7% lower. Out of the millions of permit holders in America, the law has worked.

But the anti-gun crowd focus’ on one and only one instance where the law hasn’t worked.
What they leave out is the suspect in the Nye’s shooting was not even carrying a gun at the time. He was thrown out of the bar, and then retrieved his gun. Permit or not, this crime would have happened. Do you honestly believe if the suspect did not have a permit, this would have prevented this crime?

Of course they also forget to mention a leader of the Million Mom March, an organization that wishes to ban all guns, used a gun to kill her son’s friend.

Why aren’t the stories where a nurse thwarted a carjacking or the permit holder who shot and injured an intruder in his home focused on? How about the group of permit holders who held a fugitive at bay until the sheriff arrived?
-------------------
What really gets me is this "detail" came out Friday afternoon. It just so happens the Strib decides to push it a day before the House vote.

dleong
May 17, 2005, 02:47 PM
Halvey,

I'll personally buy you lunch if the Star and Sickle prints your letter.


DL

halvey
May 17, 2005, 02:56 PM
.I'll personally buy you lunch if the Star and Sickle prints your letter. Deal!

I wonder if this will make the House will push an ammendment so certain people with misdemeanors would be denied? Personally, I wouldn't care, but I think that will send it back to the Senate Committee where Skoglund could bleed it.

nonquixote
May 17, 2005, 07:19 PM
This guy wasn't carrying. He went and got his gun either at his house or his car.
The article in the Red Star isn't exactly clear on this. For one thing it states that he was wearing an empty holster when he was arrested. The gun hasn't been found. It also states that he was dropped off at Nyes by a woman who didn't stay. Then it states that after the shooting someone saw him go to his truck which apparently had been driven there by two other men, before fleeing and jumping into the river, and that a gun box and loaded magazine were found in the truck.

I suspect that he was carrying, but also suspect that whether he'd had a permit or not wouldn't have made a lick of difference about whether or not he would've been carrying that night.

Nonq

Lobotomy Boy
May 17, 2005, 07:31 PM
Amending the bill now would send it back to a senate committee, which would effectively kill the bill until next year. I've suggested elsewhere that any standardized guidelines take the form of a pamphlet sent to sheriff's offices around the state.

Standardized guidelines have a certain appeal, but I could see them opening up a real can of worms. For starters, by not being codified by law, they are too ambiguous to withstand any legal challenges, much like the old "reasonable but prudent" speed limit in Montana in the 1990s.

But I'm afraid the can of worms has already been opened. I can see the shooting at Nyes leading to a lawsuit against the sheriff who issued the permit to Ourada.

This shooting was a terrible tragedy, most importantly because an innocent man lost his life. But I'm afraid it is going to have ramifications for years to come, in MN and around the country. To minimize these ramifications, and more importantly to prevent such tragedies in the future, we will have to do a better job policing ourselves, and a written set of guidelines for sheriffs might be a place to start.

KAR120C
May 17, 2005, 07:41 PM
Tragic for the vicitm and his family. Unfortunate for RKBA supporters. Too bad for all concerned that this moron didn't freeze to death when he jumped in the Mississippi.

This situation kind of reminds me of all the fuss about air bags a few years ago. Reports of the handfull of people killed/injured by them swamped out the fact that they were saving thousands of people. Some illogical people actually advocated doing away with air bags, in order to save more lives :uhoh:

I'm sure many anti's will try to use this annecdote to their advantage. Don't let them, and don't panic. Just point to the (I'm estimating here) probably millions of man-years of CCW carry in this country, the number of crimes that has prevented (many of them unreported), and the very small numbers of crimes involving CCW holders.

If you base your decisions on annecdotes you can justify outlawing just about anything (cars, ladders, lawnmowers, buckets, hammers, etc...)

PowderBurn
May 18, 2005, 12:00 AM
Another thing that should be pointed out is that the unfortunate victim was NOT carrying a concealed weapon. If he had, maybe the RIGHT guy would have died. At least he would have had a fighting chance.

Lobotomy Boy
May 18, 2005, 12:11 AM
Unfortunately it appears that the P.O.S. coward Ourada shot the guy in the back, so a weapon likely wouldn't have helped the poor bouncer.

mnrivrat
May 18, 2005, 12:19 AM
I heard that the guy had a criminal and mental health history. That would mean the LE agency that issued the permit screwed up, wouldn't it?

I have heard simular - he was not legally carrying as his permit should not have been issued or should have been revolked.

Permit or not, he was not legal from the getgo .

goalie
May 18, 2005, 01:09 AM
Actually, if the moron was carrying, he was only legal because the anti's lawsuit reverted us back to the pre-MPPA days, when there were no alcohol restrictions on carrying with a permit.

It sounds like he went out to his truck or vehicle and got the firearm though.

dustind
May 18, 2005, 02:02 AM
Joel Rosenberg has lots of Minnesota CCW information, and a bit of discussion about this issue in a few of his Blog entries.

Link to Joel Rosenberg's Blog. (http://www.livejournal.com/users/joelrosenberg/)

Link to a discussion about this topic. (http://www.livejournal.com/users/joelrosenberg/119719.html#cutid1) Most of the discussion about the drunk shooter is in the "comments" section.

Another discussion about the drunk shooter. (http://www.livejournal.com/users/joelrosenberg/118741.html#cutid1) Check the comments section.

doberman
May 18, 2005, 03:25 PM
I believe we just won the House!!

:)

PowderBurn
May 18, 2005, 03:58 PM
Indeed we did! Uncap thy pen, Governor Pawlenty!!

If you enjoyed reading about "Good and bad news for MN CCW" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!