Vote no on 243
I’m a law abiding citizen, I work hard, pay my taxes and vote. Reading this bill (H.F. No. 243) has ruffled my feathers a little bit. I can understand the ban on making or selling high capacity magazines over the counter and putting in place stiffer background checks and penalties to keep guns away from people that should not have access to them.
I also agree with the requirement of training in order to have the right to own one of these guns. I have taken the permit to carry class and also gun training.
More education is probably the best way to change our culture. But to say I would be a felon after Nov. for not turning in a Winchester Model 94 30-30 is a little over the top.
There are certain things that we need to do to help make this country safer. Taking the guns away that I own will only leave me and my family vulnerable. I take offense to the idea of being treated like a criminal because someone else’s beliefs are being forced upon me.
I have been a model citizen and by no right deserve any of this. Unfortunately, there is no middle ground on the issue.
I implore you to use common sense in the matter. Vote No on H.F. No. 243. As far as I can see this bill not only attacks the secondnd amendment, but as far as I’m concerned it would attack the fourth amendment.
I read the bill again, and I would like to amend the following letter, because I saw I can have a lever action 30-30.
Jamie Olson
Ironton
Editor’s note: Olson sent this letter to all Brainerd lakes area representatives. The following are responses to his letter:
• I want to assure you I remain committed to our second amendment rights. As a sworn protector of our constitution, I am concerned about the increasing encroachment on our second amendment rights. I believe the second amendment is one of the most important rights in our country and guarantees our personal freedom. If any anti-2nd Amendment legislation advances you can count on me to voice my opposition.
Sen. Carrie Ruud
• Thank you for the message. I just want you to know that I am completely on your side regarding the second amendment issue. I will vote accordingly. Keep the faith!
Rep. Mark Anderson
• In my opinion, the DFL majorities are trying to do a massive gun grab. Below is what I believe is the current list of bills going through the House. Let your friends know that they need to contact their legislators. It does make a difference.
I am a strong advocate for Second Amendment rights. Restricting gun rights is always the “knee-jerk” reaction when bad people do bad things. The gun is not the problem.
You can count on my support if and when they try to restrict our present gun rights.
Sen. Paul Gazelka
Comments (27)
Add commentI don't see any responses
from Ward, Radinovich or Nolan. Why is that?
Gazelka thinks/feels he could be treated like a criminal ?
And he has no idea why anyone would think that ?
I guess he has a very short memory.
I am sure
Those 3 are probably too busy hiding behind their own armed security to respond F&B.
Rumor has it WARD
Rumor has it Ward is not going to run again. That would be a good reason to vote any way he wants on any thing he wants and screw his constituents. Tough crap. I don't need your vote any more attitude. Cmon Little Johnny, make your committment to us on the gun legislations.
Cap
You may want to read the piece. You are reacting to a letter written by Jamie Olson who sent it to all area reps.
The rest were responses to the letter.
I wonder about John Ward who is on the public safety committee. He usually responds to things that will be put in the paper. Nothing this time or so it seems.
Hey Cappy
You fall out of bed and bump your head again this morning. Nice change of subject. Now lets hear your reply on Little Johnny, Radinovich and Nolan. What you got to say about their reply on the gun bills. Still gonna vote for them. Probably will as long as they keep the programs coming your way.
Lil'Cappy
is a gun-grabber advocate.
Hey FNB
If someone was always shooting at you, would'nt you be against guns. Right Cappy. LOL
How do you know whether
Ward, Radinovich, and Nolan responded or not?
Do you notice how cleverly it is worded?
"The following are responses to his letter:"
not
The following are ALL of the responses to his letter:
or
The following are THE responses to his letter:
Either of these sentences seem much more likely, unless the intention was to make the others appear unresponsive. The one that showed up in the paper allows the writer to pretend nothing was received from those lawmakers.
It certainly is possible that Ward, Radinovich, and Nolan did not respond while all of these others did, but I kind of doubt it. It just seems weird how this was worded to allow the possibility that those three responded, yet making it look like they didn't.
I wonder whether it is Olson or the Dispatch responsible for this little game.
John Ward
I'm Jamie Olson, I work for the Brainerd Dispatch. I have no affiliation with the newsroom, I merely work in the same building. I heard back from the three above before my letter was printed. I have since heard from John Ward three different times. I did not write Nolan since this is a state issue and he is federal. Have not heard from Radinovich. Mr. Ward expressed his support for the second amendment and also stated we should be looking at the funding for mental illness and violent video games and the impact on society. I will post his replies in the next post. You can disagree with my views, but please don't question my integrity.
Ward's Reply
Jamie,
I apologize that I have not gotten back to you yet. I am getting over 500 e mails each day on this issue and I am way behind. I am a strong supporter of our 2nd Amendment rights, NRA endorsed and I will be voting accordingly if any gun bills are brought to a vote. Right now there will be no voting on any of the bills introduced.
Respectfully,
Rep. John Ward
Aslong as he votes against
them he's doing OK, charlie.
Now,
how about Joe R. and Nolan because Obama wants the same thing Federally.
We can already figure out what Klobuchar and the town clown will do.
snackflew
you see what Johnny said ??? Right now there will be no voting on bills. What does he mean?? Too many people payin attention right now. Vote on it at 2 in the morning when every one is sleeping???
dickle trickle
Did you see this???????????????????????????
" I am a strong supporter of our 2nd Amendment rights, NRA endorsed and I will be voting accordingly if any gun bills are brought to a vote."
Go ahead, read it again and scroll up. That is what Ward said. Do you understand what he means now????????????????
Did I use enough question marks to emphasize my point???????????????????????????
By the way Jamie, I actually thought your letter was nicely done and I agree with most of it. However, I do not like how the lead-in to the legislator response was worded. Bottom line, intentional or not, it frames things in an uneven way. You did not write to Nolan, but all the fine folks on here are clamoring for his response. Ward got back to you, however the way your letter frames it, he did not. So it is incorrect. I am not exactly sure where Radinovich stands on this, but I do know he does enjoy the outdoors himself.
I appreciate you setting the record straight on here at least.
snackflew
Sorry if i offended you I was using you're logic (if that is possible). you know twist words around, read between the lines make stuff up, you know LIE.
I just can't ask
for a better response than what you give here. Thank you!
How old are you Jamie, or what do you do for the Dispatch?
I'm thinking an intern or paper delivery person, in your teens?
Distribution Supervisor
I have worked here for 18 years.
JamieOlson
Thank you for the letter. You are straight forward and honest.
I don't know why Rino ask what you do or how old you are.
That is immaterial to this topic and reading your letter you do say "my family".
I hope he didn't mean to be condescending to you.
I doubt if you took offense anyway.
Thanks Jamie
I asked because if this was a case of the paper supporting a young kid's interest in getting involved in an issue, I'd cut a bit more slack.
Since you are nowhere near that--and a long term employee of the paper, I have to say I don't think I've ever seen anything like this in all my years of reading letters to the editor in multiple papers across the country.
Sending off a politically motivated letter--with good intentions or not (and for that record there is not one gun bill before the legislature today that I don't have problems with!)--is fine, whether it be an employee or not.
But given that it is an employee of the newspaper, there should be an obligation to at least review to see if the letter writers facts are right before printing it in the paper. In this case, he specifically mentioned that his winchester 94 would illegal under this house bill, and the BDD printed that.
This is flat out WRONG. HF243 specifically exempts lever action guns with tubular magazines. Which is exactly what the Winchester model 94, the marlin 336, and older design lever action rifles have.
Then the BDD and Jamie included in the paper responses from republican representatives he had written--something I have never seen and seems highly questionable since the legislators didn't send those in directly--but did NOT print the response for any democratic legislator. When Jamie did in fact receive a response from at least one democratic legislator, per his own admission.
Given Keith Olson's equally WRONG assertion that the federal assault gun ban proposal would ban his remington semi-automatic hunting rifle in a recent editorial, the very strong impression one is left with is that Jamie's response is part of an intentionally partisan BDD effort to play up republicans at the expense of democrats.
Which would be a shame, as it will likely lead to some people just tuning out the real message that HF 243 IS a BAD bill as written, and shouldn't even find it's way to the floor for a vote.
It's really too bad the Minnesota News Council is no longer around to take complaints!
Well PR,
you should have read all of that letter, because the guy retracted the lever action statement at the end. Or were you just writing more lies even though you did read that?
More lefter indignant baloney!
More fact checking and spell checking needed?
Did you see the big booboo on the front page of the paper today in the headline.
"Burlary" instead of burglary?
ProudRINO
I agree -- the MN News Council would have a thick file on the new BDD. Sorry they're gone.
I have no problem with an employee writing a letter-to-editor. It's somewhat more troubling, however, if there was an exception made for length of the letter with the addition of BDD infrequently-used "editorial comment" (and the added legislator responses). Very odd. Did the initial 3 legislator responses appear in the print version, with Ward's later response in the on-line version, only?
I presume the on-line version of the letter, with the inaccurate content corrected near the end, was different than the print version? (Otherwise the entire letter would have been re-written to be accurate, rather than a sentence with corrections added at the end, for on-line consumption?) Confusing.
This is a fairly decent summary of MN Legislature gun bills: http://www.minnpost.com/data/2013/02/gun-bills-2013-legislature
The final omnibus gun bill -- the version on which an actual vote will be taken -- probably won't include Hausman's H.R.243 -- that's the current buzz, anyway. Rural Dem's are holding most of the cards on this, though, House and Senate. They won't be voting yes for any bill on which their reasonable hunting constituents disapprove. And they probably won't care about the rantings of the fringe-NRA types, either (who wouldn't vote for them if they wrapped up an AR-15 and placed it under the Christmas tree for them).
My understanding BY
Is that the paper printed the false statement re: Winchester 94's being banned, did not print the retraction, and did not print anything of a response from any democratic legislators. This from someone I know who gets the paper still--I don't anymore, so am going off of his word.
Astounding really.
The real story here is that metro democrats are behind most all the gun bills, but democrats as a whole will be responsible for killing almost every bill. I would be surprised if some even get past hearings to a vote.
Still there are some pretty bad ones, and Ward is co-sponsor of a couple with problems for those of us who live in this area.
Joe Radinovich
I just got off the phone with Joe Radinovich, he is opposed to most of the proposed gun bills, especially HF No. 241 and HF No. 243.