cuchulainn
Member
1) Print articles and editorials all year saying it will make things more dangerous.
2) Take a poll asking whether it will make things more dangerous
http://www.startribune.com/stories/784/3861961.html
2) Take a poll asking whether it will make things more dangerous
http://www.startribune.com/stories/784/3861961.html
Most see handgun law making Minnesota more dangerous
Conrad deFiebre, Star Tribune
Published May 3, 2003
Minnesotans who fear that the state's new handgun law will make it a more dangerous place to live outnumber those who think it will be safer by a ratio of more than 3 to 1, the latest Star Tribune Minnesota Poll shows.
The measure, which will make permits to carry handguns in public available to more people, was signed into law Monday by Gov. Tim Pawlenty and takes effect May 28. Estimates have shown that the number of Minnesotans licensed to carry handguns could grow four to eight times over the current 11,381.
"Somebody gets irritated and pulls a gun," said Troy Williams, 28, of Blaine, a former handgun permit holder among the 55 percent of those polled who said the law will make the state more dangerous. "There's more stray bullets, road rage. All of a sudden, there's a gun involved where there wasn't before."
The 17 percent of respondents who said the law will make Minnesota safer were typified by Brett Barto, 44, of Circle Pines, a six-year permit holder who said he almost never carries his .40-caliber Glock semiautomatic pistol.
"Right now the only ones who are carrying guns are criminals," he said. "I pray to God that I would never have to use a weapon on another person. On the other hand, I have a strong aversion to me or my family being shot or stabbed because I'm ill-prepared."
Slightly more than 1 in 4 respondents expressed no opinion or said the law will have no effect on public safety.
Gun-control advocates said the findings confirm a 2001 University of Minnesota survey showing nearly two-thirds opposition to the new law. They joined DFL legislators Friday at a State Capitol news conference announcing introduction of bills that would immediately repeal the measure.
"Frankly, it's no surprise," said Mary Heller, president of the Twin Cities chapter of the Million Mom March. "It's what we've been saying for three years."
But Joe Olson, a Hamline University law professor and president of the Gun Owners' Civil Rights Alliance, said the poll question was flawed because it did not mention that permit holders must be trained in handgun use and pass criminal and mental-health background checks. When those points have been made in surveys in other states, he said, support for the change reaches as much as two-thirds.
Rob Daves, the poll's director, said "the question doesn't measure support. It measures perceptions of safety, which is an entirely different concept."
Rushing to pack?
The poll also showed 22 percent of respondents say they would consider getting a permit to carry a handgun, while 76 percent said they wouldn't. But that's not to say that a fifth of Minnesota's adult population, or nearly 800,000 people, will rush right out to get legally armed at a cost for training and a five-year license of about $250.
"If a private citizen would want to, they should be able to," said Victoria Xavier-Freyr, a software project manager from Minneapolis. "I'd consider it, but I would much rather have a new dress."
Olson said he expects about 40,000 people to get Minnesota handgun permits in the next year and the number eventually to rise to 80,000. An official legislative estimate put the number at 90,000 after three years.
The poll also showed that 41 percent of Minnesotans have working firearms in their homes. Olson said the latest results may not be reliable because "gun owners are starting to lie because they don't trust the media."
A look at past Minnesota Poll findings shows that proportion to be fairly stable (38 percent) from five years ago, the last time the poll measured it.
But even respondents in households with guns were more likely to say the new law will make the state more dangerous than to say it will be safer, by 38 percent to 25 percent.
Two-thirds of respondents who think it will make the state safer said they would consider getting a permit. Even a few (6 percent) of those who fear the state becoming more dangerous said they would consider it, too.
The poll found that men and women are deeply divided on the issue. Three times as many men as women -- 33 percent to 11 percent -- said they'd consider getting a permit.
Both men and women think the new law will make the state more dangerous, but it's more striking among women, with 70 percent citing the danger and 9 percent saying it will be safer. Among men, 41 percent say it will be more dangerous and 23 percent say it will be safer.
At least three-fifths of college graduates, DFLers, liberals, Twin Cities-area residents and those in the lowest income bracket also believe the state will become more dangerous. The view of a safer Minnesota is most prevalent among Republicans and conservatives. But even in those groups, more think it will be more dangerous than safer.
'Uphill battle'
Under the old system, permit applicants had to show an occupational need or personal safety hazard, giving police chiefs and sheriffs broad power to deny them. Under the new law, only sheriffs will administer permits and their discretion will be severely limited.
At Friday's news conference, Sen. Wes Skoglund, DFL-Minneapolis, said that one of the men accused this week in the robbery-homicides of five people in their homes has only a misdemeanor record and could not have been denied a permit under the new rules.
Said Rep. Nora Slawik, DFL-Maplewood: "Before an accident happens, we have to repeal this law and we have to repeal it now." But, she added, doing that will be "an uphill battle."
While the current majorities of the House and Senate are unlikely to reverse their votes of last month, Sen. Ellen Anderson, DFL-St. Paul, said it might be possible to pass amendments limiting more broadly the places that handguns could be carried.
Gun-rights proponents, however, argue that the more places made off-limits to handguns the fewer violent criminals will be deterred from assaults, rapes and murder.
"I don't think it will have any effect on the corrupt part of the population getting guns because they already have them," said Dale DeNault, 52, of Maplewood. "But maybe just the knowledge of it will help."
But Patty Cook, 50, an emergency-room physician from Apple Valley, said she has treated too many gunshot wounds to bear optimism about the new law.
"People would be able to bring guns into sports arenas," she said. "Who knows what could happen? Somebody could have a bad day and pull out a gun and start firing and innocent people could get hurt. I wouldn't feel safe in large crowds."
Conrad deFiebre is at [email protected].
© Copyright 2003 Star Tribune.
