by Dave Workman
Senior Editor

By the time you read this, there may—or may not—be a new handgun carry statute in Minnesota to replace the one declared unconstitutional earlier this spring.

The push was on as both Gun Week’s deadline, and the Minnesota legislature’s adjournment deadline, approached. Lawmakers were working feverishly on a bill similar to the law that was struck down by a state appeals court because it had been attached to legislation directed at the Department of Natural Resources when it was originally passed in 2003.

The new bill is a stand-alone package, with tighter background check requirements and training requirements, according to The Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

Sponsored by Sen. Pat Pariseau (R-Farmington), who was also primary sponsor of the 2003 legislation, the bill was put on something of a fast track almost immediately after an appeals court upheld a lower court ruling that the 2003 law was unconstitutionally passed. While that case may go to the state Supreme Court, passage of a new law might make that unnecessary.

According to The St. Paul Pioneer Press, Pariseau is not happy about amendments that were placed on her bill that would prohibit licensed guns in churches without permission. Concealed handguns would also be prohibited in schools, universities and various properties owned by youth organizations, The Star-Tribune reported. In addition, those carrying licensed handguns would be prohibited from consuming any alcoholic beverage. One other provision that seemed to anger gun rights activists is a change in posting. Under the old law, signs had to be posted stating clearly that guns were off limits in a specific facility. Under the new proposal, property owners can either post signs or simply make an oral request to keep guns out.

One proposed amendment seemed aimed directly at advocates of the 2003 law. Under the new bill, only the Minnesota Department of Public Safety could certify the required handgun training.

One leading Minnesota gun rights activist told Gun Week on condition of anonymity that he attended the committee hearing and it appeared that anti-gunners were deliberately trying to derail the carry bill by adding several “poison pill” amendments.

“They wanted to make permits to carry so basically restrictive that they (would be) useless,” the activist said.

Pariseau was vowing to challenge those amendments on the Senate floor when the legislation came up for debate.

She told The Pioneer Press that members of a Senate Crime Prevention and Public Safety Committee “went overboard” with amendments.

The 2003 law had been challenged in the courts by anti-gun church groups that did not want firearms in the churches, but also appeared totally opposed to legalized carry of any kind.

Under the 2003 law, an estimated 25,000 Minnesota citizens obtained concealed pistol licenses (CPLs) that were still being recognized when the court ruling returned concealed carry to a discretionary system that had been in place for several years prior to passage of the reform measure.