Minnesota House gun-control bill focuses on background checks

  • Article by: Jennifer Brooks , Star Tribune
  • Updated: February 28, 2013 - 10:59 PM

However, the bill deliberately ignored assault-weapons bans and ammunition clip sizes. One foe said it makes no difference. It’s DOA.

  • 4
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 4 of 4
gudagadagMar. 1, 13 6:14 AM

Just a note: It's not correct to say an individual can always purchase a firearm online without a background check. Let's say someone in Minnesota wishes to purchase a firearm they saw advertised on the internet from a seller in Texas. The F.F.L. (Federal Firearms License) holder selling the firearm has to physically transfer that firearm to another FFL holder here in Minnesota. THAT FFL holder performs the background check before the customer receives the firearm.

5
1
fishanhunt2Mar. 1, 13 7:49 AM

Another pro gun control article by a Strib. writer. Why not just leave the slant out of it and present the facts? Restricting, penalizing and pushing laws that only the law abiding will follow will have little impact on the criminals. What is proposed is a knee jerk, feel good bill that erodes our 2nd Amendment rights as law abiding citizens. It is only a start to total gun control by those who profess an anti-gun agenda.

3
5
tomstromieMar. 1, 13 8:31 AM

How will background checks be enforced unless every single firearm is registered? Registration seems to be real goal here.

2
5
dismaynardMar. 1, 1312:57 PM

So, what they expect to happen is that if private sales are taking place, the seller and the buyer agree to take the firearm to an FFL to do a transfer and during that process, the buyer will be checked out as they would be if they purchased the firearm at Cabela's, correct? Well, any law abiding citizen today that does not want their identity associated with a firearm they are selling would meet the buyer at an FFL and go through the paperwork and checks to transfer the firearm to another individual properly so that they are not liable for that firearm if it turns up in a crime. I personally would not sell a firearm without the transfer of ownership paperwork being completed properly because I would not want my name associated with that firearm after it leaves my possession. This is what law abiding people do. When on earth will a criminal ever purchase a firearm from a private party that requires that it be transferred through an FFL? These lawmakers don't get it at all. Criminals are criminals because they break the law. They don't adhere to the laws, and no matter how many laws you make up, they will laugh and go about their business as though nothing changed. But let's make sure we get all the law abiding firearm owners on file, because the law abiding will register their firearms if required to do so, so that when another crazy criminal commits a heinous act, they know who has firearms they can take away by creating more knee jerk legislation in response to the heinous act of the week.

2
1
  • 1 - 4 of 4

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT