goalie
Member
I have been reading some of these threads for quite some time, and rarely post. I did, however, recently take the time to actually write (not e-mail) some of our Minnesota State Senators before Minnesota passed a shall-issue carry law. Today in the mail I got this back:
Dear David,
Thank you for your recent letter regarding the Minnesota Personal Protection Act (MPPA). So far in my brief career, this has been the issue that has generated more letters, e-mails, and phone calls than any other. The volume of correspondence speaks to the importance this issue has for many people, hawever there has been about an equal number of messages on both sides of the issue.
The position I have taken on this issue has remained the same as I had throughout last fall's campaign:
-We already have a handgun permit law
-that law has been enforced in an arbitrary manner through local diacretion
-the new law makes specific requirements to obtain a permit to carry
-assures there will be uniform administration of the law
-there is no evidence, either among current Minnesota permit holders or among permit holders in the other 34 states with similare provisions, that the legal permit holders constitute a danger to themselves or the public.
I have absolutely no interest in supporting any provision that would impair public safety. As I have listened to those opposed to the new law, I have concluded that most of the opposition is from those who are generally opposed to guns, which I am not. I have repeatedly sought for specific information that would link those with legal permits and crime and/or violence, but have been unable to find any such information.
There is no question that there has been a great deal of emotion expressed over this issue. But, it seems clear to me that the second amendment guarantees the right for individuals to have guns, and that the right to self-defense has long been established as a fundamental human right. It just does not seem proper to presumptively deny law-abiding citizens their ability to exercise these rights. If we are to do so, we should be able to show cause for that denial - that they are a danger to their fellow citizens. Since there has been no evidence presented to make that case, I have supported the passage of the MPPA.
Sincerely,
David Hann
State Senator
District #42
It is signed in pen with a little handwritten PS saying thank you for your support on this issue, I used material for your letter while speaking on the floor debating the bill.
Those of you from Minnesota are fully aware of the ridiculous rhetoric and lies that have been screamed loudly for the last few weeks since the MPPA passed and was signed into law. This was one heckuva nice breath of fresh air to my day.
This is all I have to say to the lying liberals who wore flack jackets on the senate floor (against regulations) while screaming "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!"
Dear David,
Thank you for your recent letter regarding the Minnesota Personal Protection Act (MPPA). So far in my brief career, this has been the issue that has generated more letters, e-mails, and phone calls than any other. The volume of correspondence speaks to the importance this issue has for many people, hawever there has been about an equal number of messages on both sides of the issue.
The position I have taken on this issue has remained the same as I had throughout last fall's campaign:
-We already have a handgun permit law
-that law has been enforced in an arbitrary manner through local diacretion
-the new law makes specific requirements to obtain a permit to carry
-assures there will be uniform administration of the law
-there is no evidence, either among current Minnesota permit holders or among permit holders in the other 34 states with similare provisions, that the legal permit holders constitute a danger to themselves or the public.
I have absolutely no interest in supporting any provision that would impair public safety. As I have listened to those opposed to the new law, I have concluded that most of the opposition is from those who are generally opposed to guns, which I am not. I have repeatedly sought for specific information that would link those with legal permits and crime and/or violence, but have been unable to find any such information.
There is no question that there has been a great deal of emotion expressed over this issue. But, it seems clear to me that the second amendment guarantees the right for individuals to have guns, and that the right to self-defense has long been established as a fundamental human right. It just does not seem proper to presumptively deny law-abiding citizens their ability to exercise these rights. If we are to do so, we should be able to show cause for that denial - that they are a danger to their fellow citizens. Since there has been no evidence presented to make that case, I have supported the passage of the MPPA.
Sincerely,
David Hann
State Senator
District #42
It is signed in pen with a little handwritten PS saying thank you for your support on this issue, I used material for your letter while speaking on the floor debating the bill.
Those of you from Minnesota are fully aware of the ridiculous rhetoric and lies that have been screamed loudly for the last few weeks since the MPPA passed and was signed into law. This was one heckuva nice breath of fresh air to my day.
This is all I have to say to the lying liberals who wore flack jackets on the senate floor (against regulations) while screaming "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!"
