Disqus - Latest Comments for bryanstrawser

Re: UMN hosts gun violence town hall | The Minnesota Daily

bryanstrawser — Tue, 27 Mar 2018 09:32:57 -0000

It's truly unfortunate that Minnesota's pro-gun rights organization - the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus - was not invited to at least make this an intellectually honest debate.

Re: With no fear of gun control, people lose jobs at ammo maker

bryanstrawser — Mon, 26 Jun 2017 16:41:28 -0000

And yet with legislatures (see MN in 2013) and the President (see President Obama, several times) propose strong anti-gun measures, the fear skyrockets.

It's not the rhetoric that is the issue - it's the *proposed regulation or legislation.

Re: Should gun makers be allowed to create handguns that look like cellphones?

bryanstrawser — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 09:36:25 -0000

So what ban would you like to argue for this time?

Re: Should gun makers be allowed to create handguns that look like cellphones?

bryanstrawser — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 11:59:31 -0000

It is a crime in Minnesota for a firearm to be left where a child can access it.

Re: New gig: the response is humbling and I might be back.

bryanstrawser — Tue, 01 Apr 2014 12:28:03 -0000

Good things eventually happen to good people - I'm glad things are going the right direction for you. I'm looking forward to reading your posts!

Re: North Side Groups Aim At Gun Violence

bryanstrawser — Wed, 19 Mar 2014 21:22:43 -0000

Leroy Duncan, of Protect Minnesota states that "Protect Minnesota is not trying to take away your guns.”.

Except this isn't true.

In 2013, Protect Minnesota testified in favor of a bill that would have criminalized the ownership of thousands of different firearms. Transfer of those firearms would have been prohibited, citizens would have been required to allow the County Sheriff to inspect their homes at any time for onerous "safe storage" requirements, and so on. Upon the owner's death, the firearm had to be turned over to law enforcement, destroyed, or taken out of state.

So yes, Protect Minnesota is trying to take away and ban guns. In fact, their Board Chair Joan Peterson continues to advocate for such actions at her blog on a regular basis.

Re: Enough is enough: Permit concealed carry

bryanstrawser — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:08:31 -0000

There is ABSOLUTELY no evidence to support your claim. please post your evidence.

Re: Enough is enough: Permit concealed carry

bryanstrawser — Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:08:07 -0000

Yes. YES. YES!

As a Carlson School of Management Student, I find it outrageous that my civil rights are denied just because I'm an enrolled student the moment I walk onto campus.

It is *wrong* that students are not allowed to defend themselves.
It is *wrong* that students are instructed by the police not to resist.
It is *wrong* that the U of MN ignores state law and ejects permit to carry holders that are not students, faculty, or staff from university facilities.

Re: Minn. House Speaker: No Gun Bills This Year

bryanstrawser — Wed, 01 May 2013 20:08:06 -0000

These bills never had any popular support in this state. The professional, out-of-state funded, lobbyists like Protect Minnesota's Heather Martens were the ones supporting this stuff - not the everyday citizens that came out in hundreds day after day after day in opposition to these ineffectual laws.

The real shame is that the bill that would have actually made a difference - Representative Hilstrom's bill (which enjoyed significant bi-partisan support in both houses) never even got a hearing.

Controlling law abiding gun owners rather than actually addressing crime appeared to be the priority.

Re: Background Checks

bryanstrawser — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:19:39 -0000

The problem with this poll is how the questions were asked. When you ask a different set of questions, you get very different results. The NRA has released the results of their own polling of their members - and it's *quite* different.

Re: Background Checks

bryanstrawser — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:18:31 -0000

It's a valid argument in some ways - but we have to remember that at it's core we're talking about a fundamental constitutional right that an individual has to own and possess a firearm in their home for self-defense under the 2nd amendment. There are only so many burdens that you can put in place that delays, or inhibits the exercise of that right.

Re: Background Checks

bryanstrawser — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:17:05 -0000

Of course, that's *IF* your local police chief will even issue Class A permits. When I lived in MA, I had two chiefs that only issued them to friends, allies, and family. That's why "may issue" laws are bogus.

Re: Background Checks

bryanstrawser — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:16:17 -0000

Depends on what "drunk" means.

Under MN law, a BAC over 0.04% invalidates your carry permit when you're carrying - misdemeanor on first offense, felony on second.

We've never have an issue with this - 110,000+ folks w/ carry permits in MN. I'd rather take this approach than making it a felony to have a sip of beer while carrying.

Re: Background Checks

bryanstrawser — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:10:11 -0000

The issue around the background check law - for me - is how the concept of "transfer" gets defined. Under the bill that Senator Schumer had introduced and passed out of committee, transfer was defined exceptionally broadly - and would have easily made me into a felon for routine firearms instruction (as a NRA Instructor) - that's completely unacceptable.

Write a decent background check bill that really gets at the core of the issue and I suspect you would find much more support. Tack on all of this other stuff and it will fail.

None of this, by the way, would have prevented the tragedy in Newtown - let's be honest about that as well.

Re: Gun Control Advocates Lacking Organization At Hearings

bryanstrawser — Fri, 22 Feb 2013 23:01:53 -0000

Minnesotans won't want or need New York or California or Chicago style firearms laws here. The citizens of our state have already figured out what's going on here and they want none of it.

Why else would 3 guys from southern Minnesota take two days off of work - stay in a hotel - just to be a part of this process? No one is making them do that.

The folks arguing in favor of this sort of gun control today were paid, professional lobbyists like Heather Martens from Protect Minnesota, whose organization is funded by a large out of state foundation that supports gun control efforts across the country - and the former ATF agent, who now works full-time for Mayor Bloomberg's east coast based Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

All of the folks testifying *against* these measures were regular every-day Minnesotans.

Re: katie.pretzel — I’m a high school junior considering Indiana and wanted to know some things you love, or don’t like about it. I would love an opinion!

bryanstrawser — Mon, 18 Feb 2013 17:12:34 -0000

IU has a football team? ;)

The criminal justice program is top notch. But I may be biased.

Re: Creating a $100B Gun Safety Industry

bryanstrawser — Tue, 01 Jan 2013 18:57:54 -0000

Law abiding gun owners are not the problem. The problem is criminal use of firearms. Two entirely different populations.

Do you really expect that criminals will buy gun insurance?

Re: Creating a $100B Gun Safety Industry

bryanstrawser — Tue, 01 Jan 2013 01:23:48 -0000

What gun safety innovation are you referring to?

I can tell you I'm not interested in "broader restrictions on high capacity weapons" - nor are most gun owners.

Licensing is only applicable in a few states. Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, and a few other states require licenses just to own firearms - but the majority of states do not. 49/50 states issue some sort of license to carry a firearm (Illinois being the only exception, for now) -- several states don't require any sort of a license to carry a firearm for law-abiding citizens anyways.

You would have to institute licensing in the other states for your proposed insurance scheme to work - if I'm reading this correctly. That's something I would be opposed to in my state.

Re: Creating a $100B Gun Safety Industry

bryanstrawser — Tue, 01 Jan 2013 01:20:35 -0000

You outline this as if the armed civilian is the problem in these situations. The evidence clearly shows that permitted civilians that carry firearms commit an extremely low number of crimes. See publicly available data from Minnesota, Indiana, Florida, Ohio, Texas, and Florida for specific examples of this.

Again, this does nothing to reduce crime. The criminal element is not going to buy gun insurance.

Re: Creating a $100B Gun Safety Industry

bryanstrawser — Tue, 01 Jan 2013 01:15:05 -0000

Well, first, I don't hunt, so that gives me no incentive.
Second, from a liability perspective, I already have homeowner's insurance that has an umbrella for other personal liability, as I'm sure most folks do whether they know it or not.

Criminals aren't going to go out and get insurance on their firearms which are probably illegal for them to possess anyways.

I guess I'm not quite sure your point here. Are you trying to make firearms ownership more expensive for law abiding citizens? Are you trying to offset the cost of illegal firearms use?
What's the point of this insurance argument?

Beyond that, the Supreme Court has held in Heller and McDonald that ownership of firearms is protected by the Second Amendment. Is there another specific enumerated right that requires insurance or a tax in order to participate in it? We don't ask the New York Times to carry mandatory insurance as a publisher - or a blogger to carry required insurance in order to post on the web - so I'm unsure why this sort of prior restraint on gun ownership would even be considered feasible or constitutional.

I'm a former law enforcement professional, a NRA instructor, and a board member for Minnesota's largest gun club. I also own a safe full of firearms of various types. If I misuse them, I'm already liable both civilly and criminally. What does mandatory insurance gain us that doesn't already exist?

Re: Creating a $100B Gun Safety Industry

bryanstrawser — Mon, 31 Dec 2012 10:05:33 -0000

And if I choose not to buy insurance?

Re: Esme’s Blog: Conceal & Carry & The Mpls. Shooting

bryanstrawser — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 15:41:02 -0000

What does the fact that he had a permit have anything to do with the horrific act that he commited?

Perhaps you should look into the actual data - which shows that permit holders in Minnesota commit crimes at a rate far FAR below that of the general population... but that just wouldn't spin the story the way that you want - would it?

Re: Observations on the 2012 Aspen Security Forum

bryanstrawser — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 14:38:42 -0000

David - enjoyed your post. My observations from attending this year were quite similar to yours - I've shared this post with others that attended with me... It's a shame we didn't get to connect. I hope to see you there next year!
Bryan

Re: http://katiepretzel.com/post/20817450944

bryanstrawser — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:08:54 -0000

I love Michael Bierut... and what you've done with this!
b

Re: On Sarah Palin and the Republican Party

bryanstrawser — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:28:22 -0000

Pretty much, yes. Have been for quite some time.

The lack of an active libertarian party in Minnesota is a big part of that - Massachusetts had a highly active libertarian party, Minnesota, not so much.