Minnesota: "Gun law proposal changed after business criticism"

from the Minneapolis St. Paul Business Journal

http://twincities.bizjournals.com/twincities/stories/2003/03/31/daily46.html9:24 AM CST Friday

Gun law proposal changed after business criticism
Benno Groeneveld Web reporter

The sponsor of a bill that would make it easier for Minnesota citizens to get permits to carry concealed weapons has adjusted her proposal to meet criticism voiced by some business and building owners.

Rep. Lynda Boudreau, R-Faribault, the original sponsor of the bill, made the changes in reaction to criticism, reported by The Business Journal in its March 21 edition.

One change is that the size of "no gun" signs that building owners can put up if they want to keep guns off their property shrank from 648 square inches to 216 square inches. Also, businesses no longer have to provide lockers for guns if they don’t want people to carry their weapons into the buildings.



In addition, the new proposal would give local law enforcement more leeway to deny permit requests.



The bill was approved by the House Ways and Means Committee and is on its way to the House floor. A different bill for changes in the current concealed carry laws is working its way through the Senate.

brgoeneveld@bizjournals.com | (612) 288-2101



© 2003 American City Business Journals Inc.

In addition, the new proposal would give local law enforcement more leeway to deny permit requests.

Is this shall issue or may issue?

Also, businesses no longer have to provide lockers for guns if they don’t want people to carry their weapons into the buildings.
Too bad. This is an excellent, precedent-setting provision! :cuss:

I have no problem with private property owners prohibiting weapons on their own property, but they should be required to provide weapons lockers for those they disarm, and be held strictly liable for any injury to a person on their property so disarmed. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: