Minnesota CCW: A year later, law's impact unclear

St. Paul Pioneer Press ^ | Jun. 01, 2004 | LISA DONOVAN and JANET ROBERTS

[jdege]

A year later, law's impact unclear

Predictions both good, bad not realized
BY LISA DONOVAN and JANET ROBERTS
Pioneer Press

The acrid smell of gun smoke is not rising from every street corner, nor has crime plummeted during the year since Minnesota enacted a gun law allowing law-abiding citizens to carry a pistol in public.

"The truth is, I don't know that there has been a change one way or the other here or anywhere else," said Anoka County Sheriff Bruce Andersohn. "We had one side that swore the world would be safer, we'd be in better condition, we'd have a fall in crime. That's not a reality.

"The other side was that this would be the Wild West with a shooting on every corner. Well, I'm not seeing that, either."

The number of permits issued in the state increased more than 70 percent, from roughly 12,800 in all of 2002 to more than 22,100 since May 28, 2003, when the law took effect. That's fewer than half of the 50,000 permits that lawmakers had estimated would be given out in the first year.

Those who lobbied for the law stand by their belief that crime will fall over time as robbers, for instance, become gun-shy about whom they hold up — fearing that their next victim might be packing heat. Those who would like to repeal the law say they are concerned the current law veils permit-holders in such secrecy that you can't get an accurate picture of whether they're behaving.

While a few permit-holders have found themselves in trouble and in the spotlight, there are folks who quietly go about their business. There's 99-year-old Clinton Weber, retired and a lifelong bachelor who lives on a lake outside Faribault, and 22-year-old Angela Stack, engaged, living in Apple Valley and working at the service desk of a retail store. Weber never carries his gun. Stack carries hers every chance she gets.

FIRST-YEAR CHANGES

The current law eliminated a requirement for people to demonstrate a need to carry a handgun for their job or personal safety. But the law also toughened some existing requirements: Permit-holders no longer can take their guns onto school grounds, and people convicted of certain violent felonies, such as murder or sexual assault, will never be allowed to have permits.

Kim Stanley, a Bloomington woman working with a grass-roots organization to repeal the law, said the law is so flawed that all it can mean is trouble for every community in Minnesota.

Stanley cites a study by the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension that shows a number of people in trouble with the law were able to get permits. That includes one person convicted of domestic assault and another who threatened his mother with a rifle. In both cases, the applicants were denied permits but received them on appeal, according to a BCA statistical study of the first six months of the law.

Stanley is also concerned about what happens to those folks and others who might misuse their permitting privileges. In the first year, fewer than 20 permit-holders had their license suspended or revoked.

"I don't care if there are three — that's three too many."

It was in Anoka County where a man shot 11 bullets into the hood of his brother's car last July in an attempt to "kill it." At the time, authorities believed he may have been the first Minnesotan to have his gun permit suspended under the new law.

A Minneapolis man with a permit is to be sentenced soon for a felony terroristic threat conviction, according to Hennepin County District Court records. Brian T. Jakubowski had to surrender his permit after arguing with a neighbor over a lost puppy and pointing a gun at her, according to authorities and a criminal complaint filed against him. Jakubowski said he pulled the gun in self-defense.

John Caile, whose Conceal Carry Reform Now! worked with the National Rifle Association to help pass the new law, said he knew all along that there would be few, if any, problems with permit-holders.

As for his contention that crime would plummet, he said that in the first year of such a law there isn't going to be a sea change.

"That takes time," he said. "That doesn't happen like magic. You don't just throw a switch."

Caile said it's hard to tabulate, too, what doesn't happen. He said you won't hear the stories of permit-holders defending themselves against criminals.

"There's a heck of a lot of those people out there who aren't willing to talk about that," Caile said.

TYPICAL PERMIT-HOLDERS

Carrying a concealed weapon in Minnesota is, to a large degree, a rural male phenomenon. More than nine of every 10 permits went to men in the past year, and permits were more heavily concentrated outstate, according to a Pioneer Press analysis of permit statistics. The rate was highest in the rural counties of Cook, Itasca, Otter Tail and Traverse, where more than one in 100 residents are permit-holders.

Weber, the 99-year-old Faribault man, is one of the oldest permit-holders in the state, according to a Pioneer Press analysis of permit statistics from the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

Weber is a veteran of World War II and the Korean War and is an award-winning target shooter. He says he doesn't expect to carry one of the many handguns he owns, from a miniature .22-caliber to a .45-caliber.

"I don't expect to use it, but I'm entitled to it (a permit to carry), and I got it," Weber said. "We decent people are entitled to a permit. You know the criminal is always armed. You can't disarm them. These laws are trying to disarm the good people."

Neither he nor Stack, the 22-year-old woman from Apple Valley, has been a crime victim.

"I'm under the impression that I shouldn't have to be a crime victim before acting," she said.

Stack, an avid hunter, is trained to safely carry, use and store guns, which is a requirement of the new law.

"As a woman, I feel I have to have more of an advantage to even up the odds," Stack said. "Most guys are bigger, a little stronger. They don't feel most women are brave enough to carry."

SHERIFFS' BIG JOB

The law mandates the state's 87 county sheriffs handle the permitting process. Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher, whose office issued more than 1,600 permits in the past year, is concerned the $100-per-person permitting fee doesn't cover expenses, which includes processing and, for those who get a permit, an annual check to make sure they're law-abiding until the end of the five-year renewal period.

Fletcher believes Ramsey County conducts more thorough background checks than most counties. That means examining records to make sure someone is law-abiding, knocking on the doors of an applicant's neighbor, talking to family and even calling the applicant's boss. His office has denied about 3 percent of the applications compared with the 1 percent denial average statewide.

In many cases, Fletcher denied the permit request because he was concerned the person was a danger to self or others, a factor sheriffs can consider, according to state law.

"We think it's important we don't allow handguns in the hands of people who have demonstrated a history of irresponsible behavior. Someone with a history of DUIs, they may not be prohibited from carrying a handgun, but their behavior is such that we would want to take a closer look and consider, 'Should this person be carrying?' " Fletcher said.

In Washington County, Sheriff Jim Frank found himself in the spotlight after word got around that he was stamping each of the permits with the Latin words "sub recuso," Latin for "under protest."

It summed up his attitude toward the new process. The sheriff said once the permits began hitting mailboxes — 800-plus were issued in the last year — and the stories made their way on to the Internet, he was getting hate mail from all over.

Frank said he got an angry letter from a Baldwin, Wis., man who signed the letter "Osculor Meus Asellus."

Translated that means "Kiss my little donkey."

Or words to that effect.

Lisa Donovan, who covers public safety, can be reached at ldonovan@pioneerpress.com or 612-338-6872. Janet Roberts can be reached at jroberts@pioneerpress.com or 651-228-5507.

[jdege]

Another anniversary story.

There's another one in the St. Cloud Times, but apparently they've demanded that their articles not be even excerpted, let alone posted:

Rush for weapon permits not as strong as feared

[jdege]

To find all articles bumped to bang_list, click below:
click here >>>	bang_list	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

Bookmark the bang_list. This is not a "ping" list (no one maintains a list of interested FReepers). It is a do-it-yourself, see-what's-been-bumped-to-the list. Anyone can bump an article to the list by sending it To: *bang_list Then, interested FReepers can (bookmark and) check the list periodically to see new articles. Please do not ask me to "add you to the list." It doesn't work like that. This is better than a ping list because (1) anyone can bump an article to the list, and any interested parties can see the list of articles 24x7.

[Monty22]

The change is that the people have their constitutional rights partially restored.

[ClearCase_guy]

Bingo. Constitutional Rights restored, with no apparent downside. The fact that the Media presents this as "unclear" says a lot about their position on the matter.

[elbucko]

The fact that the Media presents this as "unclear" says a lot about their position on the matter.

Whenever a reporter speaks or writes and uses the term "packing heat", they have already exposed their biased, anti-self defense position. "Packing heat" is a term of contempt and not one of a familiarity with the subject.

[ibbryn]

The headline says the impact of the law is unclear, but that is incorrect.
The law was passed a year ago and has had no negative affect on the citizens - no gunfights in over parking places or shoot outs by people cutting in line at the grocery. No negative affect - the law is a good one.

[Destructor]

"Those who lobbied for the law stand by their belief that crime will fall over time as robbers, for instance, become gun-shy about whom they hold up — fearing that their next victim might be packing heat."

It worked in Texas! When Dimocrat Gov. Ann ("Ma")Richards left office, Texas had a revolving door prison system, and a high rate of violent crime. George W. Bush let the people vote on CCW, and initiated the "Three Strikes" Law. CCW, and the "Three Strikes" Law changed all of that dramatically.

[Mulder]

Frank said he got an angry letter from a Baldwin, Wis., man who signed the letter "Osculor Meus Asellus."

LOL! Good for him.... very creative!

The truth is, I don't know that there has been a change one way or the other here or anywhere else," said Anoka County Sheriff Bruce Andersohn. "We had one side that swore the world would be safer, we'd be in better condition, we'd have a fall in crime. That's not a reality.

It doesn't matter if it reduces crime (although John Lott has documented that is does).

The fact is that it is our Right as Americans to keep and bear arms.

The state has no lawful authority to infringe upon it.

[Monty22]

"Whenever a reporter speaks or writes and uses the term "packing heat", they have already exposed their biased, anti-self defense position. "Packing heat" is a term of contempt and not one of a familiarity with the subject."

Indeed, the terms they use explains a lot. Packing heat, to me, is a positive term. However to the phobic mothers out there (the audience) it means horrors and shootouts.

I guess journalists deserve their degrees. They know how to use words to push the liberal agenda.

[Hunble]

It is time that we bring out the video recordings from last year.

Remember how our "honorable" representatives showed up for the vote by wearing bullet-proof vests last year?

Time to rub their noses in it, for lying to the citizens of Minnesota.

What else have they lied about?

[Trillian]

I remember when all the nuts were out saying it'd be like the Ok Corral out in the streets..

[Mulder]

What else have they lied about?

They lie about it every time a CCW bill comes up in every state. And they are wrong on every single occassion.

[Hunble]

But, but, but...

Minnesota is special and unlike all of the other States. We will murder each other...

Keep pushing the law-abiding citizens and those predictions may become fact.

Please do not get me wrong. Fighting and violence are only options when you have no other choice.

In my life, I have only been in a fight once. That was back in high-school and a bully terrorized me for months, but I refused to fight him. Something about being a computer nerd seems to piss people off. LOL

One day, he came to my house and demanded that I fight with him. I refused and closed the door.

My father happened to hear that conversation and jumped all over me. I was given a simple choice: Fight this bully, or fight him!

So, the bully, my father and I marched down to an open field and prepared for this fight. Oh, this was some sort of an interesting event, since about 20 people had gathered.

Fight the bully, or fight my father.....

Perhaps some of you can recognize what happened to me that day. I learned something about myself that changed my life forever.

Once I am forced into a fight, I will try to kill. There is no middle ground for me.

I do not remember all that happened in those few minutes, but my father had to pull me off of this boy. I had forced his face into the mud and he was turning blue from lack of oxygen. All I could think about, was to kill this person who forced me into this .

Since that day, I have never gotten into a fight again. That day taught me many things about myself.

Today, I will do anything to avoid a fight. But if forced into it, I know what I will do.

Now what does this have to do with the CCW laws enacted last year? Perhaps you should ask my father.

[Mulder]

My father happened to hear that conversation and jumped all over me. I was given a simple choice: Fight this bully, or fight him!

Your father sounds like a great guy, and you probably have a lot of good stories about him. It sounds like he was from a generation of men that built this country up.

Today, I will do anything to avoid a fight. But if forced into it, I know what I will do.

You speak for a lot of folks. And the day may very well come when Patriots are "forced" into a fight.

[Hunble]

Your father sounds like a great guy, and you probably have a lot of good stories about him. It sounds like he was from a generation of men that built this country up.

Count on it! He was an espionage agent during the Korean conflict. Of his unit of 23 people, only 2 survived.

That day, I hated him. Today, I can only thank him for changing my life forever.

I served 20 years in the Army.

[Destructor]

"Today, I will do anything to avoid a fight. But if forced into it, I know what I will do."

"Now what does this have to do with the CCW laws enacted last year? Perhaps you should ask my father."

Man, I heard that! This is exactly why the Left will ultimately lose that fight. They don't know it, but they're about to get their asses kicked, and their faces rubbed in the mud.