Subject: Modifications to proposed firearm casing requirements change sell Metro residents short and create a BAD precedent
While your intentions may be good with respect to HF128 (which is now on
page 15-16 of a larger game and fish bill (HF)1238), you know what they
say about paving the road to hell.
I am greatly concerned by the unintended consequences of this bill.
I am particularly disturbed by the following concessions:
15.24(1) within the seven-county metropolitan area as defined in section
15.26(2) within an area where the discharge of a firearm has been
prohibited under section
15.28(3) within the boundaries of a home rule charter or statutory city
with a population
15.29of 2,500 or more;
15.30(4) on school grounds as regulated under section 609.66, subdivision
15.31(5) otherwise restricted under section 97A.091, 97B.081, or 97B.086.
#1 forces tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of metropolitan gun owners
into "second class citizen" status. There are numerous places to hunt in
the metro area, and many hunters originate in the metro.
#2 creates a situation where hunters will have to know the city ordinances
of every organized city or village through which they may pass. There are
many hunters who pass through small towns between hunting locations, and
many others who stop in the same small towns for gas, or unforeseen
emergencies. Do you intend to require that hunters plan their emergencies
far enough our to check on city ordinances during business hours?
#3 creates the same issues as #2, addressed above.
Please rethink this bill. It leaves too many questions and will cause too
many problems. As I am sure you are aware, gun rights are about more than