Minnesota: Anti-Second Amendment Bill To Be Heard in Committee Tomorrow, March 3!

On Wednesday, March 3, the House Civil Justice Committee will hold a hearing on House File 1396. This bill includes a provision that would allow a court that issues a domestic abuse protective order to prohibit the respondent from having any contact with a PET OR COMPANION ANIMAL OWNED, POSSESSED, OR KEPT by a party protected in the order. This new provision could have serious consequences for Minnesotans who exercise their right to keep and bear arms.

Under Minnesota law, a person who is convicted of violating an order of protection may not possess a pistol for three years from the date of conviction. However, if the court finds the person "used" a firearm in any way during the commission of the violation, the court may prohibit the person from possessing any firearm for ANY period longer than three years or for the remainder of the person’s life. In the latter case, the court shall also order that the firearm be summarily forfeited. Because this bill would allow a court to order the respondent to have no contact with the pet or companion animal, such an order could be violated merely by inadvertent contact with a "protected" pet. Thus, depending on the circumstances of the contact, a person could be subject to these firearms prohibitions for contacting the pet or companion animal, whether or not the contact resulted in injury or trauma to the animal.

Any number of relatively innocent or unintentional scenarios could easily be imagined for such contact. Even intentional contact with a pet that is the subject of a protective order is clearly too low a threshold for a person to lose the ability to exercise a fundamental constitutional right. The same considerations simply do not apply to contact with animals as apply to contact with people. While this bill was originally designed to protect animals, it would also provide unintended and unjustified deprivation of people’s Second Amendment Rights.

one ‘what-if’ case in point: Officer Friendly’s spouse files for divorce and ,at the recommendation of their attorney, files a restraining order to keep officer Friendly from visiting their child at times other than the court-designated visitation time. Officer Friendly runs into their kid at the grocery store and says hello.Officer Friendly is then made the subject of an OFP for this infraction and it includes ‘protected pet’, Scraps the Dog. During Officer Friendly’s morning run in the nieghborhood, Scraps the dog gets loose and runs to his former master. Officer Friendly can’t outrun Scraps and has ‘contact’ with the Scraps in full view of the former spouse who is chasing Scraps.

Now Officer Friendly loses their firearms rights as well .

one ‘what-if’ case in point: Officer Friendly’s spouse files for divorce and ,at the recommendation of their attorney, files a restraining order to keep officer Friendly from visiting their child at times other than the court-designated visitation time. Officer Friendly runs into their kid at the grocery store and says hello.Officer Friendly is then made the subject of an OFP for this infraction and it includes ‘protected pet’, Scraps the Dog. During Officer Friendly’s morning run in the neighborhood while carrying and concealing their personal firearm, Scraps the dog gets loose and runs to his former master. Officer Friendly can’t outrun Scraps and has ‘contact’ with the Scraps in full view of the former spouse who is chasing Scraps. Under this language, that would be deemed “use” of a firearm in the commission of the violation.

Now Officer Friendly loses their firearms rights as well and heretofore is restricted to a desk job.The “remainder of the person’s life is a very long time” and it seems openly vague,too restrictive and open to loose interpretations.

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.