Minnesota Bill Would Ban Transfer of Semi-automatic Firearms

AmmoLand ^ | March 22, 2025 | Dean Weingarten

[Ex-Con777]

I’m glad my M&P 15 and Bullpup didn’t make the list. That’s in case I ever recover them from the bottom of the lake and move to Minnescrotum.

EC

[Texas Fossil]

Keep, means you can give them away if you like. Those you give them to are citizens and they are protected against confiscation. The #ComDem’s are either insane or simply Evil, the law, if passed, will be unconstitutional. The #ComDem’s do not care about the Constitution, in fact they hate it. Just like they hate our freedom. 1st and 2nd Amendments are Freedom Granted by GOD not Government.

[Big Red Badger]

My Semi-Auto Thompson M1 was outlawed 5yrs after I bought it ——!?!
Yuppers-Clazy.

[blackberry1]

(2) any firearm that is another model made by the same manufacturer as one of the
firearms listed in clause (1), and has the same action design as one of the listed firearms,
and is a redesigned, renamed, or renumbered version of one of the firearms listed in clause
(1), or has a slight modification or enhancement, including but not limited to a folding or
retractable stock; adjustable sight; case deflector for left-handed shooters; shorter barrel;
wooden, plastic, or metal stock; larger clip size; different caliber; or a bayonet mount; and
(3) any firearm that has been manufactured or sold by another company under a licensing
agreement with a manufacturer of one of the firearms listed in clause (1) entered into after
the effective date of Laws 1993, chapter 326, to manufacture or sell firearms that are identical
or nearly identical to those listed in clause (1), or described in clause (2), regardless of the
company of production or country of origin.
The weapons listed in clause (1), except those listed in items (iii), (ix), (x), (xiv), and (xv),
are the weapons the importation of which was barred by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms of the United States Department of the Treasury in July 1989.
Except as otherwise specifically provided in paragraph (d), a firearm is not a
“semiautomatic military-style assault weapon” if it is generally recognized as particularly
suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes under United States Code, title 18,
section 925, paragraph (d)(3), or any regulations adopted pursuant to that law.
(b) Semiautomatic military-style assault weapon also includes any:
(1) semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has
one or more of the following:
(i) a pistol grip or thumbhole stock;
(ii) any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the
nontrigger hand;
(iii) a folding or telescoping stock; or
(iv) a shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel,
allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but
excluding a slide that encloses the barrel;
(2) semiautomatic pistol, or any semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle with a fixed
magazine that has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition;
(3) semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and has
one or more of the following:
(i) any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the
nontrigger hand;
(ii) a folding, telescoping, or thumbhole stock;
(iii) a shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel,
allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but
excluding a slide that encloses the barrel; or
(iv) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at any location outside of the pistol
grip;
(4) semiautomatic shotgun that has one or more of the following:
(i) a pistol grip or thumbhole stock;
(ii) any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the
nontrigger hand;
(iii) a folding or telescoping stock;
(iv) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of ten rounds; or
(v) an ability to accept a detachable magazine;
(5) shotgun with a revolving cylinder; or
(6) conversion kit, part, or combination of parts from which an assault weapon can be
assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person.
Semiautomatic military-style assault weapon does not mean any firearm described in this
paragraph that has been made permanently inoperable.

[_longranger81]

Not a gun owner, but it seems to me whether you describe a gun as a tool for self-defense or an “Assault Weapon” depends pretty much on which end of it is pointed at you.

[dljordan]

Too bad we don’t have a Supreme Court.

[mrmeyer]

Some laws are meant to be ignored, this is one of them. Compliance only serves to give legitimacy to the illegitimate government that would propose such a rights violation

[kawhill]

I noticed the M60 and M240 aren’t listed so I’m OK.

[MtnClimber]

You can’t prevent transfers unless you have registration. Why would anyone oppose registration? This is why. This is why building a gun on an 80% lower is so appealing. They are just undocumented assemblies of metal and plastic. The left likes the undocumented; right?

[MtnClimber]

I am glad I never thought about owning any of THOSE.

[Paal Gulli]

This is a clear violation of the 5th and 14th Amendments.

Yes, I said FIFTH and FOURTEENTH Amendments.

Don't be so quick to jump on the 2A bandwagon if you can let another amendment do the heavy lifting. Because when you invoke 2A, IF you should lose (which is always a possibility), you do damage to EVERY aspect of 2A, not just those associated with the case in point.

Why the 5th & 14th Amendments? Because both protect against being deprived of "... life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ...."

And SCOTUS has ruled that the intrinsic worth of all property is its monetary value. To restrict commerce with any item of property is to reduce its monetary worth. Therefore laws limiting commerce with any item of property (without each individual case getting its day in court) violates the 5th and 14th Amendments. And the 14th specifically forbids the several states from imposing legislation with that effect.

This will never stand SCOTUS review, and not even the ALCU is going to defend a bill that infringes its beloved 5th Amendment. But none of that matters because the demoncrat's new tactic is to clog the court system with the sheer volume of their clearly unconstitutional new laws (Minnesota, Colorado and Mexifornia seem to be leading that pack).

[The Great RJ]

Welcome to the Peoples Republic of Minnesota comrade, now show your papers while our officers search your dwelling and car for contraband. Grandpa said before he died his gun collection fell out of the boat when he was duck hunting.

[Salman]

This will probably go to the Supreme Court. We’ll see.