• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

!!!Massive gun confiscation bill passes MN House!!! Alert!!

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...ners-under-restraining-and-protective-orders/


Anyone at anytime for any reason can get a restraining order against you no matter what the media and law says. Beware. And if you want to see government efficiency, you watch how quickly the "heroes" will SWAT team you once the order has been given.
Any cites to back up any of these claims?

Also, title is very misleading.

Finally, many states already have legislation like this and the "heroes" don't swat peoples houses all that often based solely on this.

You sound like an anti crying there will be blood in the streets when pro gun bills get passed. Truth is there will be no blood in the streets based on their claims, nor yours.

The sky is falling the sky is falling!!!!

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Any cites to back up any of these claims?

Also, title is very misleading.

Finally, many states already have legislation like this and the "heroes" don't swat peoples houses all that often based solely on this.

You sound like an anti crying there will be blood in the streets when pro gun bills get passed. Truth is there will be no blood in the streets based on their claims, nor yours.

The sky is falling the sky is falling!!!!

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Cop, are you this ignorant or being facetious?
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Is that your cite to back up your claims?

Cmon you can do better :D

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Cop, I've read the bill and the article, have you? How is it you are supposedly in law enforcement and don't know easy it is for a woman to get a restraining order? I knew about this bill months ago from friends who live there, the bill was written and delivered by Michael Bloomberg's anti gun group. The bill has since been amended but is still a giant ****. People will have their guns taken away for no reason because of this legislation.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Cop, I've read the bill and the article, have you? How is it you are supposedly in law enforcement and don't know easy it is for a woman to get a restraining order? I knew about this bill months ago from friends who live there, the bill was written and delivered by Michael Bloomberg's anti gun group. The bill has since been amended but is still a giant ****. People will have their guns taken away for no reason because of this legislation.
Still no cites.

I'm aware of how easy it is to get a restraining order. Also aware of how often they are served. Also aware of the fact you do get a day in court to contest any allegations made by said female/male.

Do you have any cites that states that have this bill or some version have any sort of "gun confiscation aahhhhhhhhhhhh" going on?

I'm aware my state has it, but yet not many guns are confiscated as a result.

I'm interested to see your cites though. I'll patiently wait.

The sky is falling.....

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

robdoar

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
152
Location
Minneapolis
Did you actually read the bill?

Please do.

Mr. Farrago got many facts wrong in his article. We're working with him to correct it.

In the mean time, please specifically cite the infringements present in the bill, because I worked on it every step of the way to remove every attempt from the Mayors to obstruct due process.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Did you actually read the bill?

Please do.

Mr. Farrago got many facts wrong in his article. We're working with him to correct it.

In the mean time, please specifically cite the infringements present in the bill, because I worked on it every step of the way to remove every attempt from the Mayors to obstruct due process.

Thanks.
The link to the recent bill is broken, or I can't access it for some reason. What changes were made?
 

robdoar

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
152
Location
Minneapolis
HF3238 MN
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?b=House&f=HF3238&ssn=0&y=2013

[FONT=arial, sans-serif]This bill doesn't affect Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs) nor ex parte (temporary) Orders For Protection.
Here's what already happens now, under current state and federal law:
1. A complainant (Carol) alleges domestic abuse by a boyfriend (Bob).
2. A judge grants Carol an ex parte (legalese for "one party") order for protection. It basically says that Bob can't abuse or have contact with Carol. It doesn't include anything about guns.
3. Bob gets served NOTICE of this order.
4. Bob has an option to request a HEARING to review the order. He brings his lawyer, Carol brings hers.
5. If a judge finds, in that hearing, with legal representation and argument from both sides (DUE PROCESS), that Bob significant threat of physical harm to Carol, the judge may make the order final for a period of time (commonly three years).
6. If that order includes findings of significant seriousness of the threat, the Wellstone Amendment (federal law) makes Bob prohibited from possessing firearms.
7. Bob is responsible for getting any guns out of his possession, as he has become a prohibited person for the duration of the order. Typically, he and his lawyer have planned for this eventuality, and already had the guns removed. If not, there is an unwritten grace period of three days before anyone goes after Bob for possession.
If this bill becomes law, THINGS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME, EXCEPT FOR #7:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW #7. Within three days, Bob has to move his guns to a law enforcement agency, an FFL, or a third party (friend, relative, etc.). Within two days after that, the police, FFL or third party has to notify the court in writing that the move has been made.[/B][/B]
  • The notification is sealed by the court
  • Bob retains full title to his property
  • Bob can, if he chooses, direct the third party to sell the guns on his behalf
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
HF3238 MN
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/bill.php?b=House&f=HF3238&ssn=0&y=2013

[FONT=arial, sans-serif]This bill doesn't affect Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs) nor ex parte (temporary) Orders For Protection.
Here's what already happens now, under current state and federal law:
1. A complainant (Carol) alleges domestic abuse by a boyfriend (Bob).
2. A judge grants Carol an ex parte (legalese for "one party") order for protection. It basically says that Bob can't abuse or have contact with Carol. It doesn't include anything about guns.
3. Bob gets served NOTICE of this order.
4. Bob has an option to request a HEARING to review the order. He brings his lawyer, Carol brings hers.
5. If a judge finds, in that hearing, with legal representation and argument from both sides (DUE PROCESS), that Bob significant threat of physical harm to Carol, the judge may make the order final for a period of time (commonly three years).
6. If that order includes findings of significant seriousness of the threat, the Wellstone Amendment (federal law) makes Bob prohibited from possessing firearms.
7. Bob is responsible for getting any guns out of his possession, as he has become a prohibited person for the duration of the order. Typically, he and his lawyer have planned for this eventuality, and already had the guns removed. If not, there is an unwritten grace period of three days before anyone goes after Bob for possession.
If this bill becomes law, THINGS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME, EXCEPT FOR #7:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW #7. Within three days, Bob has to move his guns to a law enforcement agency, an FFL, or a third party (friend, relative, etc.). Within two days after that, the police, FFL or third party has to notify the court in writing that the move has been made.[/B][/B]
  • The notification is sealed by the court
  • Bob retains full title to his property
  • Bob can, if he chooses, direct the third party to sell the guns on his behalf
[/FONT]
Thank you for the citation and explanation. If you had a part in this then good work.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

robdoar

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
152
Location
Minneapolis
Thank you for the citation and explanation. If you had a part in this then good work.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Appreciate it.

We were faced with a seemingly impossible task of preventing the Mayors Against Illegal Guns from cramming infringements thorough the largely anti gun Democrat stronghold at the Capitol, controlling both chambers of the legislature, and the Governors seat. We were successful in removing every conceivable infringement and limited the bill to a minor procedural change to what is already current law.

If you could have seen what was in the first draft, you'd all be up in arms.

But alas, that is the nature of lobbying. 90% of what you do is working to kill bad things before they even see the light of day. It's largely thankless, but incredibly necessary work to preserve and restore our rights.
 
Last edited:

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Appreciate it.

We were faced with a seemingly impossible task of preventing the Mayors Against Illegal Guns from cramming infringements thorough the largely anti gun Democrat stronghold at the Capitol, controlling both chambers of the legislature, and the Governors seat. We were successful in removing every conceivable infringement and limited the bill to a minor procedural change to what is already current law.

If you could have seen what was in the first draft, you'd all be up in arms.

But alas, that is the nature of lobbying. 90% of what you do is working to kill bad things before they even see the light of day. It's largely thankless, but incredibly necessary work to preserve and restore our rights.
Thank you for your service. The original intent of the bill was so bad I didn't think anything of it at the time because I figured it wouldn't go anywhere. Bloomberg is injecting millions into his disarmament agenda nationwide
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Well glad to see the sky won't fall down for at least one more day.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

AhCrap

New member
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
1
Location
United States
Appreciate it.

We were faced with a seemingly impossible task of preventing the Mayors Against Illegal Guns from cramming infringements thorough the largely anti gun Democrat stronghold at the Capitol, controlling both chambers of the legislature, and the Governors seat. We were successful in removing every conceivable infringement and limited the bill to a minor procedural change to what is already current law.

If you could have seen what was in the first draft, you'd all be up in arms.

But alas, that is the nature of lobbying. 90% of what you do is working to kill bad things before they even see the light of day. It's largely thankless, but incredibly necessary work to preserve and restore our rights.
Do you have a link to the first draft by any chance? If there is no link can you describe what was in the first draft?
 

robdoar

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
152
Location
Minneapolis
Do you have a link to the first draft by any chance? If there is no link can you describe what was in the first draft?
No link, this was before the bill was introduced.

Initially it applied to ex-parte orders (only an accusation needed), forced LEO / FFL (no third party) storage for fees that could quickly exceed value of gun, no judge discretion, and paperwork traps to snag people as non compliant just to name a few.
 
Top