Hello everybody it's your fellow man from the frozen tundra of Minnesota with an action item via the
NRA-ILA.
House File 1396 is being heard tomorrow (March 3rd) by the House Civil Justice Committee. What the bill would do is establish orders or protection to cover pets and companion animals owned or kept by the people "protected" (We all know how well a piece of paper works) by the order.
What does that matter here in Minnesota? I'll let the NRA-ILA explain that:
Under Minnesota law, a person who is convicted of violating an order of protection may not possess a pistol for three years from the date of conviction. However, if the court finds the person "used" a firearm in any way during the commission of the violation, the court may prohibit the person from possessing any firearm for ANY period longer than three years or for the remainder of the person’s life. In the latter case, the court shall also order that the firearm be summarily forfeited. Because this bill would allow a court to order the respondent to have no contact with the pet or companion animal, such an order could be violated merely by inadvertent contact with a "protected" pet. Thus, depending on the circumstances of the contact, a person could be subject to these firearms prohibitions for contacting the pet or companion animal, whether or not the contact resulted in injury or trauma to the animal.
I don't even know what this bill is supposed to accomplish but I'm not at all surprised to see Representative Paymar's name on it. He's one of the biggest enemies of the second amendment this state has.
Here is the phone number and e-mail address of each member of the committee:
