New Minnesota silencer bills. HF 1434 and SF 1435. - Page 3

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - New Minnesota silencer bills. HF 1434 and SF 1435. (Page 3 of 14)

Posted: 3/13/2015 4:42:34 PM EDT

[#1]

They really should have brought up the CDC's position and studies as well as had a representative for OSHA to explain decibel level's... that would have weeded out that crazy old bastard and some of the opposition

Posted: 3/13/2015 6:03:19 PM EDT

[#2]

Quote History

Quoted:

They really should have brought up the CDC's position

View Quote

What is their position on this subject?

Posted: 3/13/2015 6:38:26 PM EDT

[#3]

Quote History

Quoted:

That gal from NRA-ILA that spoke for about ten seconds at the end of the second session...how u doin'?

View Quote

Be careful, think twice before posting nonsense

Posted: 3/13/2015 7:08:53 PM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:
What is their position on this subject?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
They really should have brought up the CDC's position

What is their position on this subject?

Center for Disease Control wrote:
"The only potentially effective noise control method to reduce students' or instructors' noise exposure from gunfire is through the use of noise suppressors that can be attached to the end of the gun barrel. However, some states do not permit civilians to use suppressors on firearms."

ETA: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2011-0069-3140.pdf page 5 first paragraph

Posted: 3/13/2015 10:32:00 PM EDT

[#5]

CBS MN News on Suppressor Bill

"Gov. Mark Dayton said he doesn’t plan on changing the state’s gun laws."

I have a feeling we're going to get to the front of the line with our money in hand to be told to turn around by this Bozo.

Posted: 3/14/2015 6:17:45 AM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:

CBS MN News on Suppressor Bill

"Gov. Mark Dayton said he doesn’t plan on changing the state’s gun laws."

I have a feeling we're going to get to the front of the line with our money in hand to be told to turn around by this Bozo.

View Quote

If bet quite a bit of money on this.

Then again I doubted ccw would pass too

Posted: 3/14/2015 10:38:21 AM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:
CBS MN News on Suppressor Bill

"Gov. Mark Dayton said he doesn’t plan on changing the state’s gun laws."

I have a feeling we're going to get to the front of the line with our money in hand to be told to turn around by this Bozo.

View Quote

What happens if he shuts it down? Can they just keep trying? Sending my opinion to the governor along with supporting data.

Posted: 3/14/2015 12:16:16 PM EDT

[#8]

They can keep trying.
http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/Vetoes/aboutveto.aspx

A two-thirds vote of the members in each house is needed to override a veto. But because only the governor can call a special session of the Legislature, anything vetoed after the Legislature adjourns is history—at least until next year.

View Quote

archive.leg.state.mn.us/docs/pre2003/other/980058.pdf

If he vetoes a bill, he shall
return it with his objections to the house in which it originated. His objections shall be entered in the journal. If, after
reconsideration, two-thirds of that house agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the governor’s objections, to
the other house, which shall likewise reconsider it. If approved by two-thirds of that house it becomes a law and shall be
deposited in the office of the secretary of state.

View Quote

Randy

Posted: 3/14/2015 8:13:49 PM EDT

[#9]

if this bill somehow passes and is veto'd it will NOT be overridden, veto overides rarely occur, the party that is the same as the Gov. won't stick a fork in his eye and vote to overide. look at how pissed he was with the commisioner pay thing. he was pissed. he'd be even more pissed if his party voted to overide a veto of his. won't happen.

Posted: 3/14/2015 8:48:53 PM EDT

[#10]

How many blue dog democrats are there in the MN DFL?

Randy

Posted: 3/15/2015 12:18:38 PM EDT

[#11]

Collin Peterson is it as far as I know.

Posted: 3/15/2015 4:37:21 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:
Collin Peterson is it as far as I know.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:
Collin Peterson is it as far as I know.

He's my Senator. Not sure on how to read him, but apparently hes got an A+ rating from the NRA. This is what he said in his last message from me..

Like most Americans, I am appalled at the level of crime in the United States. However, I will continue to support efforts to enforce stronger penalties for criminals who commit crimes with guns, and I will continue to strongly oppose any legislation that would punish and restrict the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens.

Not sure if what he is sending me is some copy paste job, but at least it's not a flat out rejection.

Posted: 3/15/2015 6:02:15 PM EDT

[#13]

Quote History

Quoted:

Then again I doubted ccw would pass too

View Quote

Yup, and ccw never did pass here

Posted: 3/15/2015 8:42:09 PM EDT

[#14]

Quote History

Quoted:

Yup, and ccw never did pass here

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Then again I doubted ccw would pass too

Yup, and ccw never did pass here

Can you elaborate on this?

Posted: 3/16/2015 12:05:49 AM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

YQuoted:
Can you elaborate on this?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

YQuoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Then again I doubted ccw would pass too

Yup, and ccw never did pass here

Can you elaborate on this?

You just struck a nerve calling it ccw is all.

Posted: 3/16/2015 12:57:13 AM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:
You just struck a nerve calling it ccw is all.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

YQuoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Then again I doubted ccw would pass too

Yup, and ccw never did pass here

Can you elaborate on this?

You just struck a nerve calling it ccw is all.

CCW/PTC... your both right, now lets get back on topic

What is the next step in the process of getting cans?

Posted: 3/16/2015 7:49:36 AM EDT

[#17]

The process of getting a can is to:
1.) Get legislation passed through the house & senate.
2.) Get it passed through the Governor.
3.) Once in effect, you contact a dealer to purchase a can.
4.) Depending on dealer, typically you pay for the can, write a $200 check, and fill out some papers including a set of finger prints, and get CLEO Sign-off.
5.) Wait, and wait, and wait, and wait, and YAY! Suppressor!

Posted: 3/16/2015 10:10:53 AM EDT

[#18]

Quote History

Quoted:

CCW/PTC... your both right, now lets get back on topic

What is the next step in the process of getting cans?

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

YQuoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Then again I doubted ccw would pass too

Yup, and ccw never did pass here

Can you elaborate on this?

You just struck a nerve calling it ccw is all.

CCW/PTC... your both right, now lets get back on topic

What is the next step in the process of getting cans?

I'll be honest, I thought he was saying something that related back to the bill somehow… Guess I'm pretty far removed from the lingo considering I called it CCR in a recent post (Yeah).

Also, it looks like 66/134 house members are DFL, and 44/81 MN senate members are DFL. Does the bill have to pass in both the senate and the house?

Posted: 3/16/2015 10:53:46 AM EDT

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:
Also, it looks like 66/134 house members are DFL, and 44/81 MN senate members are DFL. Does the bill have to pass in both the senate and the house?

View Quote

Yes, that's correct. The senate companion bill to HF 1434 is SF 1435. I wouldn't be surprised if it passes both houses, but I'd be shocked if Goofy Eyes signed it.

Posted: 3/16/2015 11:32:22 AM EDT

[#20]

Quote History

Quoted:

Yes, that's correct. The senate companion bill to HF 1434 is SF 1435. I wouldn't be surprised if it passes both houses, but I'd be shocked if Goofy Eyes signed it.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Also, it looks like 66/134 house members are DFL, and 44/81 MN senate members are DFL. Does the bill have to pass in both the senate and the house?

Yes, that's correct. The senate companion bill to HF 1434 is SF 1435. I wouldn't be surprised if it passes both houses, but I'd be shocked if Goofy Eyes signed it.

I don't really see how we could put enough political pressure on Gov. Dingbat to get him to sign the bill.

Posted: 3/16/2015 3:10:11 PM EDT

[#21]

Hearing (tomorrow) Tuesday evening.

Civil Law and Data Practices Committee
Tuesday, March 17, 2015
6:00 p.m.
Room 500 North
State Office Building

Map: https://goo.gl/maps/01YTD

PARK FOR FREE after 4 p.m. in lot AA (at Aurora & Rice)
______________

The bill is expected to go on to the Public Safety committee on Thursday morning.
______________
Public Safety and Crime Prevention Policy and Finance
Thursday, March 19, 2015
10:15 a.m.
Room 10
State Office Building

Map: https://goo.gl/maps/01YTD

PARK for $1.75/hr in lot AA (at Aurora & Rice) or at meters

GOCRA's Facebook page for any updates.

Posted: 3/16/2015 3:39:40 PM EDT

[#22]

I spoke to GOCRA President Andrew Rothman at the Capitol. We are going to use the CDC data previously linked, and some other data I found to prove that suppressors are necessary to safely rifle hunt. Now that the issue is hearing protection and not poaching concerns or assassins we should do much better in the Senate.

Hunting is protected and recognized by the MN Constitution. You can't rifle hunt, especially with a muzzle brake, without permanent irreversible hearing loss unless you have a suppressor. This data can really blow the door open on the issue.

I can prove with .mil research and other .gov sources as well as research group and industry data that the max sound attenuation from plugs and muffs is about 33db. The reason is bone conduction, you need a full face sealed helmet like the sound helmets worn on aircraft carriers to protect yourself past ~33db.
I also have studies showing hearing loss in men from target shooting and hunting.

All Protect Minnesota could do was quote from Salon Magazine, the Brady lady was quoting an article from Mother Jones.

This debate has just gotten a lot easier.

Dayton has drifted (been dragged) to being more pro-gun. He was publicly against changing Capitol carry regs, and made luke warm pro gun statements last year. He said he wasn't looking to adopt gun control this year. Hopefully we can get suppressors and a few other mild bills through. the House will be easy, the Senate hard, an override won't make it in the Senate.

All gun control will fail in the House Committee by either unanimous or one pro control vote.

I will be at the Capitol tomorrow (Tuesday) and Thursday.

Posted: 3/16/2015 3:53:46 PM EDT

[#23]

I know the debate is easier with both House & Senate under control, but with Dingbat the presiding ruler of the land, I fear it likely still won't pass.

Posted: 3/16/2015 4:07:07 PM EDT

[#24]

Arrrrrgh three round burst!

Damned government computers...

Single

Posted: 3/16/2015 4:07:44 PM EDT

[#25]

Double

Posted: 3/16/2015 4:08:06 PM EDT

[#26]

Quote History

Quoted:

What happens if he shuts it down? Can they just keep trying? Sending my opinion to the governor along with supporting data.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
CBS MN News on Suppressor Bill

"Gov. Mark Dayton said he doesn’t plan on changing the state’s gun laws."

I have a feeling we're going to get to the front of the line with our money in hand to be told to turn around by this Bozo.

What happens if he shuts it down? Can they just keep trying? Sending my opinion to the governor along with supporting data.

They can attach it to another bill as an amendment to something he very much wants to sign.

For instance: A gas tax increase. Because both a gas tax increase and NFA stuff have to do with taxes, there is a common thread, thus you could do that.

Posted: 3/16/2015 6:40:20 PM EDT

[#27]

Has anyone contacted the governor? Is it worth it?

Posted: 3/16/2015 7:48:47 PM EDT

[#28]

Quote History

Quoted:All Protect Minnesota could do was quote from Salon Magazine, the Brady lady was quoting an article from Mother Jones.

View Quote

Are you talking about the Alexander Zaitchik article from Salon and referenced in Mother Jones? http://www.salon.com/2012/12/30/silencers_the_nras_latest_big_lie/

I wrote this guy a long letter about the errors in his article. We ended up talking on the phone and it turns out he is completely uninterested in addressing his errors in print. Protect Minnesota tried to tell me how bad silencers and the NRA were by showing this article to me. I wrote back telling them not to be taken in by the tall tales in Zaitchik's article.

Randy

Posted: 3/16/2015 10:43:55 PM EDT

[#29]

Yes, that is the one.

It is impossible to talk to them online without being banned from their social media no matter how polite and helpful you are. Their leader Heather Martens never misses an opportunity to state lies and crazy accusations.

I was thinking about writing up or finding a rebuttal and leaving copies for people to pick up at the Capitol, but I haven't had time with all of the sound suppressor and hearing damage research I have been doing. Do you have any material, or links to something that would rebut Alexander Zaitchik? She literally just left copies of that article out, and was quoting it during her turn to speak at the hearing. It was clear she knew nothing about the topic that she didn't "learn" from that piece.

Joan Peterson from Protect Minnesota, Brady Campaign, and MMM was using http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/03/guns-nra-national-rifle-association-wants-states-legalize-silencers-supressors as her source, and held up all of the photos from the end of the article for the news media.

If anyone has a solid rebuttal suitable for leaving as a handout at the capitol I would appreciate it. I will print and deliver them.
Even info that has been researched that could reduce the time someone else has to spend would be nice.

Posted: 3/16/2015 11:20:11 PM EDT

[#30]

Here are some great articles that include both supporting facts and statistics to use... I would lean the facts more towards the childrens safety even liberals on the fence can comprehend that, especially infants in the case of a home invasion... with all the information provided backed by the CDC's research even Dayton will have a hard time finding enough negative to outweigh the positives.

http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/Recreational-Firearm-Noise-Exposure/

http://www.silencerresearch.com/hearing_protection.htm

http://hearinghealthfoundation.org/statistics

http://www.betterhearing.org/hearingpedia/hearing-loss-prevention/noise-induced-hearing-loss

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2532893/

http://www.entnet.org/content/noise-induced-hearing-loss-children

http://www.livestrong.com/article/528530-dangerous-noise-levels-for-infants/

ETA: This could be used as a handout, it hits on almost everything http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/Suppressors.pdf

Some Facts and Government regulations from across the pond http://wp.roedale.de/en/hauptmenue/schiesslaermminderung/faqs/thema-hoerschaden/

Found this on a Liberal website http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/11/05/405370/-A-Democrat-s-guide-to-why-firearm-sound-suppressors-silencers-should-be-made-easier-to-obtain

Posted: 3/17/2015 5:11:29 AM EDT

[#31]

Awesome, thank you. I have a thread going on at www.armedpolitesociety.com with a lot of information and sources. Myself and others have stumbled on some amazing evidence.

For bonus points does anyone have any sources concerning hearing loss in hunting dogs? I can't help but believe a suppressed shotgun is far better for mans best friend.

Posted: 3/17/2015 10:27:42 AM EDT

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:
Awesome, thank you. I have a thread going on at www.armedpolitesociety.com with a lot of information and sources. Myself and others have stumbled on some amazing evidence.

For bonus points does anyone have any sources concerning hearing loss in hunting dogs? I can't help but believe a suppressed shotgun is far better for mans best friend.

View Quote

Hunting dogs and hearing loss study conducted by Mississippi State University.... http://www.msstate.edu/web/media/detail.php?id=1812

Posted: 3/17/2015 11:01:47 AM EDT

[#33]

The problem with those articles in Salon and Mother Jones is that they are pandering to those who don't want to think for themselves. Protect MN decided to oppose silencers and will choose any source that agrees with them, doesn't matter if it is true or not. I've been posting on their Facebook page, but getting very little feedback.

Randy

Posted: 3/17/2015 2:54:43 PM EDT

[#34]

Protect Minnesota isn't even a legitimate group. It is nothing more or less than a paid campaign by the Joyce Foundation. I have rarely seen any legitimate followers of theirs show up more than once. We have converted a few, and moved most of the rest to fence sitters status, causing them to not bother showing up ever again.

We do have people who try to correct them, no matter what you do or how politely you do it you will only get banned for your troubles. Maybe some of their readers will see it before it is deleted. Almost every gun control group in MN is out of members. I think their internet presence and activities are causing their members to see the light and leave. Their statements are just way too easy to disprove, especially in the online era.

That said, I am going to try and get some material to place next to theirs at the Senate hearing. It will make them look just a little bit more foolish.

Edit: i will likely be there before 5:00PM tonight, room 500 North state office building.

Update: It passed this committee unanimously, it will be heard again Thursday morning were it will pass, most likely unanimously as well.

Posted: 3/17/2015 7:08:35 PM EDT

[#35]

Quote History

Quoted:

Are you talking about the Alexander Zaitchik article from Salon and referenced in Mother Jones? http://www.salon.com/2012/12/30/silencers_the_nras_latest_big_lie/

I wrote this guy a long letter about the errors in his article. We ended up talking on the phone and it turns out he is completely uninterested in addressing his errors in print. Protect Minnesota tried to tell me how bad silencers and the NRA were by showing this article to me. I wrote back telling them not to be taken in by the tall tales in Zaitchik's article.

Randy

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:All Protect Minnesota could do was quote from Salon Magazine, the Brady lady was quoting an article from Mother Jones.

Are you talking about the Alexander Zaitchik article from Salon and referenced in Mother Jones? http://www.salon.com/2012/12/30/silencers_the_nras_latest_big_lie/

I wrote this guy a long letter about the errors in his article. We ended up talking on the phone and it turns out he is completely uninterested in addressing his errors in print. Protect Minnesota tried to tell me how bad silencers and the NRA were by showing this article to me. I wrote back telling them not to be taken in by the tall tales in Zaitchik's article.

Randy

Yeah, because they were published with errors for the explicit purpose of misleading people.

Posted: 3/17/2015 8:15:05 PM EDT

[#36]

Quote History

Quoted:
Yeah, because they were published with errors for the explicit purpose of misleading people.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:All Protect Minnesota could do was quote from Salon Magazine, the Brady lady was quoting an article from Mother Jones.

Are you talking about the Alexander Zaitchik article from Salon and referenced in Mother Jones? http://www.salon.com/2012/12/30/silencers_the_nras_latest_big_lie/

I wrote this guy a long letter about the errors in his article. We ended up talking on the phone and it turns out he is completely uninterested in addressing his errors in print. Protect Minnesota tried to tell me how bad silencers and the NRA were by showing this article to me. I wrote back telling them not to be taken in by the tall tales in Zaitchik's article.

Randy

Yeah, because they were published with errors for the explicit purpose of misleading people.

Fear mongering is the work of liberals, it works very well for them to sway uneducated sheep

Posted: 3/17/2015 10:34:15 PM EDT

[#37]

Like others, I am hoping this changes.

Tag for updates.

Posted: 3/19/2015 12:41:59 AM EDT

[#38]

Does anyone have information on ShotSpotter? http://www.shotspotter.com/ I have been tasked with researching its ability to detect suppressed gun shots.

I could use good official government scientific sources, or at least standardized official government sources for suppressed and unsuppressed rifle and other firearm db values. I can find industry, manufactures, and third party data, but official government would be nice for some uses.

The use of suppressors by law enforcement in MN, and any positive things they have to say about them, especially from officials on record.
Other state LEO or fed statements about, or studies that say positive things about the benefits of suppressors for police use would help.

Anything related to the MotherJones or Salon article.

I will let you know how the hearing goes tomorrow. My prediction is 100% of the votes in favor. (Edit: I must have posted that past midnight AR15 time, everything happened today. Thursday the 19th)

Posted: 3/19/2015 11:43:47 AM EDT

[#39]

What hearing is scheduled for the 20th? I didn't see it at http://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/legis.aspx where I usually go for info on MN bills.

The MN police are not interested in speaking at the hearings?

Randy

Posted: 3/19/2015 12:26:54 PM EDT

[#40]

Quote History

Quoted:
Does anyone have information on ShotSpotter? http://www.shotspotter.com/ I have been tasked with researching its ability to detect suppressed gun shots.

I could use good official government scientific sources, or at least standardized official government sources for suppressed and unsuppressed rifle and other firearm db values. I can find industry, manufactures, and third party data, but official government would be nice for some uses.

The use of suppressors by law enforcement in MN, and any positive things they have to say about them, especially from officials on record.
Other state LEO or fed statements about, or studies that say positive things about the benefits of suppressors for police use would help.

Anything related to the MotherJones or Salon article.

I will let you know how the hearing goes tomorrow. My prediction is 100% of the votes in favor.

View Quote

Just looking through the maps you can see how ineffictive they are, besides the fact that perps dont generally stick around after shootings..
http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/police/statistics/crime-statistics_codefor_shotsfired

ETA: Going through the maps for 2015 only I have came up with 12 shootings
231 sounds of shots fired
118 shot spotter activation's
only 9 of of them were within a mile of a shot spotter activation but there is no data showing that the activation was even on the same day as the shooting.

overlay of all 2015 maps

I had to downsize the map to fit the thread the full map and all the maps used are located here
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nybdx9yss3jeir0/AACQEwnFmZlhQCeuIAp8XO5ua?dl=0

Posted: 3/19/2015 2:16:46 PM EDT

[#41]

I would think it's safe to say that the type of person looking to legally obtain a suppressor and go through all the background checks and ATF stuff, probably doesn't live in that upper left quadrant where the majority of the red dots are.

Posted: 3/19/2015 4:12:21 PM EDT

[#42]

Quote History

Quoted:
I would think it's safe to say that the type of person looking to legally obtain a suppressor and go through all the background checks and ATF stuff, probably doesn't live in that upper left quadrant where the majority of the red dots are.

View Quote

never know.

Posted: 3/19/2015 7:24:32 PM EDT

[#43]

Interesting map.

Suppressed handguns are still pretty loud so on general principal I wouldn't assume they would defeat a shot spotter. The real advantage of suppressors is for indoor home defense if you're planning on defending against multiple attackers and want to reduce muzzle blast/flash. Honestly if we ever do get the law overturned I'd probably pick one up for a .22 and would only do a suppressed 9mm/subsonic combo if I had money to burn.

But I'd still like the option.

Posted: 3/20/2015 12:19:31 AM EDT

[#44]

The hearings were today, Thursday the 19th. Everything has made it to the House floor intact.

Some interesting bits of drama and debate today. Huge fight on the house floor with yelling and such.

www.armedpolitesociety.com has some details. www.facebook.com/gocra for updates and a brief summary.

Hopefully we can get these bills moving in the Senate.

Posted: 3/20/2015 10:37:12 AM EDT

[#45]

I can't find anything on the MN legistlature website about a committee hearing date in the Senate.

Does anyone know when we should expect something to get on the calendar? Are we just 'waiting our turn' on the list of proposed bills?

Is there a risk of it not getting heard in the Senate committee, which could kill the whole thing before even getting to the Senate floor?

Posted: 3/20/2015 2:53:32 PM EDT

[#46]

Quote History

Quoted:
I would think it's safe to say that the type of person looking to legally obtain a suppressor and go through all the background checks and ATF stuff, probably doesn't live in that upper left quadrant where the majority of the red dots are.

View Quote

Funny, but that is not the point. Self defense is a basic human right. If you are an eligible purchaser (not a criminal) there is no reason supressors should not be available for sale to anyone regardless of economic status.

Posted: 3/20/2015 3:03:16 PM EDT

[#47]

Quote History

Quoted:
The hearings were today, Thursday the 19th. Everything has made it to the House floor intact.

Some interesting bits of drama and debate today. Huge fight on the house floor with yelling and such.

www.armedpolitesociety.com has some details. www.facebook.com/gocra for updates and a brief summary.

Hopefully we can get these bills moving in the Senate.

View Quote

Synopsis was a very good read!

Thanks for the links! I am hopeful!

Posted: 3/20/2015 3:20:53 PM EDT

[#48]

There is a risk the Senate won't even have a hearing on any of these bills, but GOCRA is working on that. GOCRA would likely be the first to know when and if the hearings are held. That said, expect some shenanigans with the hearings schedule, senator Latz, the Chair of the Committee, loves doing that.