Posted on 01/14/2011 5:35:35 AM PST by marktwain
Editor's Note: Through 17 localized stories that all went online today, Minnesota Patch explores an aspect of the state's Personal Protection Act that prohibits cities from banning firearms in their government centers and other city buildings. Click the "Change Towns" in the upper right corner of the Patch home page to read the stories posted on other Minnesota Patch sites.
When state legislators were debating changes to concealed carry law nearly six years ago, Edina Mayor Jim Hovland fought hard to ensure local officials still had the power to ban guns from city buildings.
He recalls testifying to legislators against the changes, but what sticks out in his memory is the staggering number of residents from rural areas of the state lobbying to convince the legislature otherwise.
At the time, Edina City Council also passed a resolution supporting the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association's stance discouraging passage of the concealed carry law.
They lost that fight.
"We viewed it as something that was not evolutionary, but devolving in nature," Hovland said. "The longer the human race is around, we thought we should be getting more civilized, and it didn't seem right people should be able to carry concealed weapons into some of the places they're now allowed to have them."
While state offices, churches, public schools, private businesses and courthouses can ban people from bringing guns through the front door, city government buildings and meeting places unattached to courthouses are open to anyone armed and holding a permit to carry a firearm.
Patch has looked into Minnesota’s Personal Protection Act of 2005—more commonly known as the “concealed carry law”—which explicitly forbids cities from banning firearms on city property, including municipal offices and parks. While permit carriers can also bring guns into the chambers of the Minnesota State Legislature,
(Excerpt) Read more at edina.patch.com ...
It is all about how you view the people. If you distrust them, and want the government to have all power, you are in favor of the ban. If you trust the people and want to empower them, you are against more government bans.
As usual, they are making this much more complicated than it really is.
From the article: “The only oversight cities, counties and other types of government retained was the ability to dictate where guns can be fired,”
The solution is very simple, ban the firing of guns inside a government building.
Every bit a sensible as banning guns, and much simpler to implement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.