[jdege]

Bang!

[jimkress]

Well, we've had "shall issue" in Michigan for about two years. No blood in the streets, unlike the predictions from the newspapers, the police, etc.

[wideawake]

As Bishop James Jelinek of the Episcopal Church observed, "The front door of an Episcopal Church has special meaning. Many front doors are painted red, a color which invokes the blood of Christ and signals a 'sanctuary.' "

I wonder when the Bishop last preached a sermon on the blood of Christ and its saving power.

[TomB]

The tenant's statutory gun right trumps the owner's constitutional property rights.

I wonder if they would feel the same way if a white property owner exercised his "constitutional property rights" by not renting to a black family?

I'd think not.

[OREALLY]

Very bad news for muggers.

[Puppage]

Churches are sanctuaries, places of worship

Yeah? So, crime NEVER happens there? I recall not to long ago a wacko in New York that went crazy with a sword, only to be stopped by what?

That's right...A PERMIT HOLDER!!

Let's dig a little deeper......how many church shootings by CCW holders have there been, EVER, in the other 34 states with the right to carry???Hmm?

[The Old Hoosier]

They worry that the law prohibits them from requiring that renters ban guns from the areas of church property they use.

What!!! Liberals, concerned about landlords' rights!!!!???

[Travis McGee]

The law declares that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution confers the right of individuals to bear arms -- something to which the U.S. Supreme Court has never agreed.

Do I detect a trace of anti-gun bias here?

[Puppage]

That's because it is a really stupid law .

Stupid...a FEELING.

Cures no ills...

So, if YOU were being attacked & I had my gun.....WOULD YOU WANT ME TO INTERVENE?

I believe that would cure YOUR ill at that moment, no?

Am I missing something?

BEHOLD...THE MIND OF THE DEFENSELESS

[rightwingreligiousfanatic]

You should send the editors at the (Red) Star Tribune some of these:

[Xphantasos]

What a bunch of whiney imbeciles.

[AndyTheBear]

Let me get this straight, some pyscho goes on a public property with the intent of shooting up the place. Unless the proprieters are using metal detectors or some other thing catagorically more invasive then having a sign, how could a policy of no guns on the premisis have any chance of stopping him?

Do we expect that he will be desuaded by some policy statement written in the back of some dusty filing cabinet that even the clerk may not be aware of?

Obviously the only safety that the potential victims posses lies in their ability to defend themselves. Moreover this ability is enhanced by pistols.

[Legion]

That's because it is a really stupid law that rights no wrong, cures no ill.

Yeah - equal protection under law as specified by State statute. Who needs that?

Let's continue to let the caprices of minor public officials decide who gets to exercise their rights.

That's so much more equitable for the citizens of Minnesota.

/sarcasm

[dirtboy]

The law declares that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution confers the right of individuals to bear arms -- something to which the U.S. Supreme Court has never agreed. And, curiously, in pursuit of a radical assertion of that "right,"

Stop it right there. The actual battle lies here, not in the CCW bill.

[Frohickey]

The law declares that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution confers the right of individuals to bear arms -- something to which the U.S. Supreme Court has never agreed. And, curiously, in pursuit of a radical assertion of that "right," the folks behind this new Minnesota law trample on other rights.

Take private property rights, for example. That's something most supporters of gun rights typically feel passionate about. But this gun law prohibits the owners of a rental property, for example, from denying tenants and guests the right to carry pistols. The tenant's statutory gun right trumps the owner's constitutional property rights.

If the 'right of the people' in the 2nd Amendment is not about the right of individuals, then the 'right of the people' in the 1st, 4th, 9th and 10th Amendments are for businesses, politicians, municipalities and governments. This editorial writer doesn't know what he's writing about!!!

What the private property rights aspect of this is, is that when an owner of a property rents a property out to tenants, the right to keep/bear arms in that property is transferred to the renter as well, for the duration of the rental agreement.

[RogueIsland]

The tenant's statutory gun right trumps the owner's constitutional property rights.

Umm, the tennt's gun rights are actually Constitutional, any other statutes notwithstanding.

[wjcsux]

Where is the barf alert? After all, this article is from the Star-Tribune.

[GETMAIN]

A bad idea is now a bad law
--
Indeed. Protecting oneself and one's loved ones with the most effective means available is most certainly a "bad idea". If everyone would learn to just follow the nice criminals' orders to "get face down on the floor", "gimme the keys before I cut your throat",etc., then no one would get hurt. Criminals will not hurt you as long as you don't put up a fight. </bizarro world>

[m&maz]

Typical Liberal garbage.. If they would take the time and effort needed to scope out results in states where concealed carry has been passed, these criers would be forced to dine on a healthy serving of crow.
Now, a question.. Does this new state law mention anything about reciprocal recognition with other states?

[rhema]

But. . . at least one letter writer in today's Strib got it right.

A very special section

I would like to make a special request of the Star Tribune. One year from now, on the anniversary of the Personal Protection Act, please publish a special section of your paper in commemoration.

In it, you could reprint all of the apocalyptic editorials, letters from readers and commentaries predicting a bloodbath, and for balance, you could include those few that suggested that, as in 34 other states, no such thing would happen.

We should all, by then, know who was right and who was wrong.

You could also publish a tally of those violent gun crimes that will have been prevented by posting "no gun" signs at the entrances of establishments, particularly liquor and convenience stores.

And if there is still a tiny bit of space, you could publish a list of every single one of the violent gun crimes committed by the thousands of new permit holders.

I will look forward to seeing this.

Jerry Ewing, Apple Valley.