The Minnesota legislature is considering bills that would ease restrictions on silencer possession. Previously MN had the most restrictive laws in the USA regarding silencers. The DNR was prohibited from using them for animal control and the police had very strict rules regarding their use. Police had to obtain their silencers from out of state sources as FFL's were not allowed to sell them. A few years ago restrictions were eased allowing FFL's to sell to MN government agencies, the DNR was also allowed to again use them. Police use is still restricted to emergency tactical response which would seem to prohibit their use while training. In my opinion this is a foolish requirement made by people who are ignorant of firearms in general.
Recently two bills were introduced to ease restrictions. They would allow civilian possession of registered silencers and require that the sheriff sign off applications for those allowed to possess them. It would also ease restrictions on the police and allow them to train with suppressed firearms.
The bills;
http://ift.tt/1GRCjNX
http://ift.tt/1GRChFD
The House bill (HF 1434) had a hearing on March 12th. I was not expecting the outcry from the group Protect Minnesota. The hearings can be seen here; http://ift.tt/1GRCjNZ
There was industry support for the bills, but too much repetition and not enough support by MN residents who wish to own silencers.
A Protect Minnesota representative named Heather Martens was of the opinion that “Silencers were designed to allow people to commit murders and get away with it.” much like some of the woefully uninformed persons on the ISP forum. http://ift.tt/1whEsNc
I've exchanged messages with members of Protect MN and they are foolish enough to believe the claims made by Alexander Zaitchik in his strange Salon article as well as the Mother Jones' nonsense.
Part of the Protect MN outrage was that if MN eases restrictions silencers would be uncontrolled if (when pigs fly) the feds remove them from NFA control. http://ift.tt/1CrPtnc
Ranb
Recently two bills were introduced to ease restrictions. They would allow civilian possession of registered silencers and require that the sheriff sign off applications for those allowed to possess them. It would also ease restrictions on the police and allow them to train with suppressed firearms.
The bills;
http://ift.tt/1GRCjNX
http://ift.tt/1GRChFD
The House bill (HF 1434) had a hearing on March 12th. I was not expecting the outcry from the group Protect Minnesota. The hearings can be seen here; http://ift.tt/1GRCjNZ
There was industry support for the bills, but too much repetition and not enough support by MN residents who wish to own silencers.
A Protect Minnesota representative named Heather Martens was of the opinion that “Silencers were designed to allow people to commit murders and get away with it.” much like some of the woefully uninformed persons on the ISP forum. http://ift.tt/1whEsNc
I've exchanged messages with members of Protect MN and they are foolish enough to believe the claims made by Alexander Zaitchik in his strange Salon article as well as the Mother Jones' nonsense.
Part of the Protect MN outrage was that if MN eases restrictions silencers would be uncontrolled if (when pigs fly) the feds remove them from NFA control. http://ift.tt/1CrPtnc
Ranb
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire