• 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.

news from minnesota

oliverclotheshoff

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
845
Location
mauston wi
new out of Minnesota copied from another forum


-- The Minnesota state Senate Finance Committee recently passed House File 1467, one of the NRA’s top legislative priorities, by a 10 to 5 vote. In part, HF 1467 would remove a person’s “duty to retreat” from an attacker, allowing law-abiding citizens to stand their ground and protect themselves or their family anywhere they are lawfully present.
HF 1467 contains three important firearm policy improvements, NRA-ILA reports.
Stand Your Ground:
It would create a presumption that an individual who forcefully or stealthily enters or attempts to enter your home or vehicle is there to cause substantial or great bodily injury or death, so the occupant may use force, including deadly force, against that individual. It would also expressly allow an individual to use force, including deadly force, to prevent a forcible felony, and it provides protections against criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits when justifiable force is used.
Universal Recognition:
Currently, Minnesota only has reciprocal agreements with fifteen states and twenty-three states recognize Minnesota's permit to carry. Unfortunately, Minnesota’s Department of Public Safety has not sought out any additional reciprocity agreements. By adding the proposed language, Minnesota will recognize every state that offers a carry permit and drastically improve Minnesotans’ abilities to carry for self-defense in other states. The proposed language would also require Minnesota’s Department of Public Safety to enter in to reciprocity agreements.
Emergency Powers Reform:
The proposed language would prohibit any government agency from confiscating or regulating the lawful possession, carrying, transfer, transportation and defensive use of firearms or ammunition during a state of emergency, such as occurred in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, Louisiana.


Make sure your friends and relatives across the river are contacting their legislators.
 

Yetiman

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2011
Messages
98
Location
SE Wi
As someone who travels to MN on a semi regular basis and has family there, this has me doing the Snoopy happy dance.
 

Captain Nemo

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,029
Location
Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
The bill was passed by the Minnesota House of Representatives May 14, 2011 by a vote of 79 to 50.
It was passed by the Minnesota Sebate today Feb. 23,2012 by a vote of 40 to 23.

There is some question as to if Governor dayton will veto it or not. He says he is undecided and concerned that law enforcement is against the bill. It looks like there would be enough votes to overide his veto if he does veto the bill. That is providing there aren't any turncoats. The biggest provision for us in the bill is the reciprocity conditions. Wisconsin license to carry would be recognized in Minnesota. Currently a Wisconsin CCL is not valid in Minnesota because Wisconsin does not have a requirement for live fire. Otherwise the bill is nearly identical to the "castle doctrine"law recently enacted in Wisconsin.
 

davegran

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
1,563
Location
Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wiscon
"Eliminating the common law duty to retreat"

The bill is here and has some interesting language in it, including:
5.5.... The individual may meet force
5.6 with superior force when the individual's objective is defensive; the individual is not
5.7 required to retreat; and the individual may continue defensive actions against an assailant
5.8 until the danger has ended.
and:
4.6 (d) "Dwelling" means a building defined under section 609.556, subdivision 3, an
4.7 overnight stopping accommodation of any kind, or a place of abode, that an individual
4.8 temporarily or permanently is occupying or intending to occupy as a habitation or home.
4.9 A dwelling includes, but is not limited to, a building or conveyance and that building's
4.10 or conveyance's curtilage and any attached or adjacent deck, porch, appurtenance, or
4.11 other structure, whether the building or conveyance is used temporarily or permanently
4.12 for these purposes, is mobile or immobile, or is a motor vehicle, watercraft, motor home,
4.13 tent, or the equivalent.
 

Captain Nemo

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,029
Location
Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
This is the Wisconsin definition of "dwelling' as referenced in the self defense statute 939.48.

(h) "Dwelling" means any premises or portion of a premises that is used as a home or a place of residence and that part of the lot or site on which the dwelling is situated that is devoted to residential use. "Dwelling" includes other existing structures on the immediate residential premises such as driveways, sidewalks, swimming pools, terraces, patios, fences, porches, garages, and basements.

Interesting that 'sidewalks' are included in the definition. I wonder if that implies that sidewalks are considered private property re: the GFSZ.
 
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
Interesting that 'sidewalks' are included in the definition. I wonder if that implies that sidewalks are considered private property re: the GFSZ.
In some municipalities jurisdictions sidewalks are on easements to private property. There have been some too broad statements to the contrary here.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
In some municipalities jurisdictions sidewalks are on easements to private property. There have been some too broad statements to the contrary here.

An easement does not transfer title/ownership - it confers a right to use for a specific purpose and any other pertinent particulars.
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
In context I don't think the "sidewalks" referenced are the public sidewalk on the right of way by the street or other sidewalks normally within an easment, but rather sidewalks from a driveway to front door or around the side of the house, ie sidewalks within the property boundaries.
 

Captain Nemo

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,029
Location
Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
340.01
(58) "Sidewalk" means that portion of a highway between the curb lines, or the lateral lines of a roadway, and the adjacent property lines, constructed for use of pedestrians.
 
Top