Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive :: View topic - HF1272 Interference with 911, no more guns

Quote:

<div class="xtend">
<div class="xtend_ce"><a id="pl.1.1"></a> 1.1 A bill for an act 
</div><a id="pl.1.2"></a> 1.2 relating to public safety; providing that interference with an emergency call 
<a id="pl.1.3"></a> 1.3 disqualifies an offender from possessing a firearm;amending Minnesota Statutes 
<a id="pl.1.4"></a> 1.4 2008, section 609.78, subdivisions 2, 3. 
<a id="pl.1.5"></a> 1.5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 
 
<a id="bill.0.1.0"></a><a id="pl.1.6"></a> 1.6 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 609.78, subdivision 2, is amended to read: 
<a id="pl.1.7"></a> 1.7 Subd. 2. Interference with an emergency call; gross misdemeanor offense. (a) A 
<a id="pl.1.8"></a> 1.8 person who intentionally interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or interferes with an emergency 
<a id="pl.1.9"></a> 1.9 call or who intentionally prevents or hinders another from placing an emergency call, 
<a id="pl.1.10"></a> 1.10 and whose conduct does not result in a violation of section
<statute_ref>609.498</statute_ref>, is guilty of a gross 
<a id="pl.1.11"></a> 1.11 misdemeanor and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to 
<a id="pl.1.12"></a> 1.12 payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both. 
<a id="pl.1.13"></a> 1.13 (b) When a person is convicted of a violation of this subdivision against a family 
<a id="pl.1.14"></a> 1.14 or household member and is determined by the court to have used a firearm in any way 
<a id="pl.1.15"></a> 1.15 during the commission of the offense, the court may order that the person is prohibited 
<a id="pl.1.16"></a> 1.16 from possessing any type of firearm for any period longer than three years or for the 
<a id="pl.1.17"></a> 1.17 remainder of the person's life. A person who violates this paragraph is guilty of a gross 
<a id="pl.1.18"></a> 1.18 misdemeanor. At the time of the conviction, the court shall inform the defendant whether 
<a id="pl.1.19"></a> 1.19 and for how long the defendant is prohibited from possessing a firearm and that it is 
<a id="pl.1.20"></a> 1.20 a gross misdemeanor to violate this paragraph. The failure of the court to provide this 
<a id="pl.1.21"></a> 1.21 information to a defendant does not affect the applicability of the firearm possession 
<a id="pl.1.22"></a> 1.22 prohibition or the gross misdemeanor penalty to that defendant. 
<a id="pl.1.23"></a> 1.23 (c) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b), when a person is convicted of 
<a id="pl.1.24"></a> 1.24 a violation of this subdivision and the court determines that the victim was a family or 
<a id="pl.2.1"></a> 2.1 household member, the court shall inform the defendant that the defendant is prohibited 
<a id="pl.2.2"></a> 2.2 from possessing a pistol for three years from the date of conviction and that it is a gross 
<a id="pl.2.3"></a> 2.3 misdemeanor offense to violate this prohibition. The failure of the court to provide 
<a id="pl.2.4"></a> 2.4 this information to a defendant does not affect the applicability of the pistol possession 
<a id="pl.2.5"></a> 2.5 prohibition or the gross misdemeanor penalty to that defendant. 
<a id="pl.2.6"></a> 2.6 (d) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b), a person is not entitled to 
<a id="pl.2.7"></a> 2.7 possess a pistol if the person has been convicted of a violation of this subdivision and the 
<a id="pl.2.8"></a> 2.8 court determines that the victim was a family or household member unless three years 
<a id="pl.2.9"></a> 2.9 have elapsed from the date of conviction and, during that time, the person has not been 
<a id="pl.2.10"></a> 2.10 convicted of any other violation of this section. Property rights may not be abated but 
<a id="pl.2.11"></a> 2.11 access may be restricted by the courts. A person who possesses a pistol in violation of this 
<a id="pl.2.12"></a> 2.12 paragraph is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. 
<a id="pl.2.13"></a> 2.13 EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective August 1, 2009, and applies to crimes 
<a id="pl.2.14"></a> 2.14 committed on or after that date. 
 
<a id="bill.0.2.0"></a><a id="pl.2.15"></a> 2.15 Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 609.78, subdivision 3, is amended to read: 
<a id="pl.2.16"></a> 2.16 Subd. 3. Definition. For purposes of this section, the following terms have the 
<a id="pl.2.17"></a> 2.17 meanings given them. 
<a id="pl.2.18"></a> 2.18 (a) "Emergency call" means: 
<a id="pl.2.19"></a> 2.19 (1) a 911 call; 
<a id="pl.2.20"></a> 2.20 (2) any call for emergency medical or ambulance service; or 
<a id="pl.2.21"></a> 2.21 (3) any call for assistance from a police or fire department or for other assistance 
<a id="pl.2.22"></a> 2.22 needed in an emergency to avoid serious harm to person or property, and an emergency 
<a id="pl.2.23"></a> 2.23 exists. 
<a id="pl.2.24"></a> 2.24 (b) "Family or household member" has the meaning given in section 518B.01, 
<a id="pl.2.25"></a> 2.25 subdivision 2. 
<a id="pl.2.26"></a> 2.26 EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective August 1, 2009, and applies to crimes 
<a id="pl.2.27"></a> 2.27 committed on or after that date. 
</div>

Author:	Mosin [ Fri Mar 06, 2009 11:22 am ]
Post subject:	HF1272 Interference with 911, no more guns
No idea what this one is about yet or if there was an incident that is driving this. But here it is anyhow. https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin ... ssion=ls86 Quote: <div class="xtend"> <div class="xtend_ce"><a id="pl.1.1"></a> 1.1 A bill for an act<br /> </div><a id="pl.1.2"></a> 1.2 relating to public safety; providing that interference with an emergency call <br /> <a id="pl.1.3"></a> 1.3 disqualifies an offender from possessing a firearm;amending Minnesota Statutes <br /> <a id="pl.1.4"></a> 1.4 2008, section 609.78, subdivisions 2, 3.<br /> <a id="pl.1.5"></a> 1.5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:<br /> <br /> <a id="bill.0.1.0"></a><a id="pl.1.6"></a> 1.6 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 609.78, subdivision 2, is amended to read:<br /> <a id="pl.1.7"></a> 1.7 Subd. 2. <b>Interference with an emergency call; gross misdemeanor offense.</b> <u>(a) </u>A <br /> <a id="pl.1.8"></a> 1.8 person who intentionally interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or interferes with an emergency <br /> <a id="pl.1.9"></a> 1.9 call or who intentionally prevents or hinders another from placing an emergency call, <br /> <a id="pl.1.10"></a> 1.10 and whose conduct does not result in a violation of section <statute_ref>609.498</statute_ref>, is guilty of a gross <br /> <a id="pl.1.11"></a> 1.11 misdemeanor and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to <br /> <a id="pl.1.12"></a> 1.12 payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both. <br /> <a id="pl.1.13"></a> 1.13 <u>(b) When a person is convicted of a violation of this subdivision against a family </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.14"></a> 1.14 <u>or household member and is determined by the court to have used a firearm in any way </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.15"></a> 1.15 <u>during the commission of the offense, the court may order that the person is prohibited </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.16"></a> 1.16 <u>from possessing any type of firearm for any period longer than three years or for the </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.17"></a> 1.17 <u>remainder of the person's life. A person who violates this paragraph is guilty of a gross </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.18"></a> 1.18 <u>misdemeanor. At the time of the conviction, the court shall inform the defendant whether </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.19"></a> 1.19 <u>and for how long the defendant is prohibited from possessing a firearm and that it is </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.20"></a> 1.20 <u>a gross misdemeanor to violate this paragraph. The failure of the court to provide this </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.21"></a> 1.21 <u>information to a defendant does not affect the applicability of the firearm possession </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.22"></a> 1.22 <u>prohibition or the gross misdemeanor penalty to that defendant.</u><br /> <a id="pl.1.23"></a> 1.23 <u>(c) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b), when a person is convicted of </u><br /> <a id="pl.1.24"></a> 1.24 <u>a violation of this subdivision and the court determines that the victim was a family or </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.1"></a> 2.1 <u>household member, the court shall inform the defendant that the defendant is prohibited </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.2"></a> 2.2 <u>from possessing a pistol for three years from the date of conviction and that it is a gross </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.3"></a> 2.3 <u>misdemeanor offense to violate this prohibition. The failure of the court to provide </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.4"></a> 2.4 <u>this information to a defendant does not affect the applicability of the pistol possession </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.5"></a> 2.5 <u>prohibition or the gross misdemeanor penalty to that defendant.</u><br /> <a id="pl.2.6"></a> 2.6 <u>(d) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b), a person is not entitled to </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.7"></a> 2.7 <u>possess a pistol if the person has been convicted of a violation of this subdivision and the </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.8"></a> 2.8 <u>court determines that the victim was a family or household member unless three years </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.9"></a> 2.9 <u>have elapsed from the date of conviction and, during that time, the person has not been </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.10"></a> 2.10 <u>convicted of any other violation of this section. Property rights may not be abated but </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.11"></a> 2.11 <u>access may be restricted by the courts. A person who possesses a pistol in violation of this </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.12"></a> 2.12 <u>paragraph is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.</u><br /> <a id="pl.2.13"></a> 2.13 <u><b>EFFECTIVE DATE.</b></u><u>This section is effective August 1, 2009, and applies to crimes </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.14"></a> 2.14 <u>committed on or after that date.</u><br /> <br /> <a id="bill.0.2.0"></a><a id="pl.2.15"></a> 2.15 Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 609.78, subdivision 3, is amended to read:<br /> <a id="pl.2.16"></a> 2.16 Subd. 3. <b>Definition.</b> For purposes of this section, <u>the following terms have the </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.17"></a> 2.17 <u>meanings given them.</u><br /> <a id="pl.2.18"></a> 2.18 <u>(a) </u>"Emergency call" means:<br /> <a id="pl.2.19"></a> 2.19 (1) a 911 call;<br /> <a id="pl.2.20"></a> 2.20 (2) any call for emergency medical or ambulance service; or<br /> <a id="pl.2.21"></a> 2.21 (3) any call for assistance from a police or fire department or for other assistance <br /> <a id="pl.2.22"></a> 2.22 needed in an emergency to avoid serious harm to person or property, and an emergency <br /> <a id="pl.2.23"></a> 2.23 exists.<br /> <a id="pl.2.24"></a> 2.24 <u>(b) "Family or household member" has the meaning given in section 518B.01, </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.25"></a> 2.25 <u>subdivision 2.</u><br /> <a id="pl.2.26"></a> 2.26 <u><b>EFFECTIVE DATE.</b></u><u>This section is effective August 1, 2009, and applies to crimes </u><br /> <a id="pl.2.27"></a> 2.27 <u>committed on or after that date.</u><br /> </div>

Author:	joelr [ Fri Mar 06, 2009 11:25 am ]
Post subject:
Given that Nora Slawick is one of the authors, I assume that it's just another attempt to nibble away. Nora is always on the lookout for such.

Author:	princewally [ Fri Mar 06, 2009 11:31 am ]
Post subject:	Re: HF1272 Interference with 911, no more guns
I guess I don't see much of a problem. Aside from the opinion that free people should have all of their rights, this only affects gun rights for people who misuse guns against their family while interfering with 911. Quote: (b) When a person is convicted of a violation of this subdivision against a family 1.14 or household member and is determined by the court to have used a firearm in any way 1.15 during the commission of the offense, the court may order that the person is prohibited 1.16 from possessing any type of firearm for any period longer than three years or for the 1.17 remainder of the person's life. Regular misuse, without a firearm only warrants a 3 year break. I don't see a major issue with this. Unless I'm wrong.

Author:	Mosin [ Fri Mar 06, 2009 11:51 am ]
Post subject:
Yea, I don't get it yet. Why the context of the 911 call? All the domestic language (family or household member) I wonder if it's tied to the recent <a href="http://www.twincitiescarry.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11907&highlight">SCOTUS Backing Lautenberg</a> If you're holding someone at gunpoint, what does it matter if you are stopping them from making the 911 call or stopping them from going to the grocery store? You are still breaking the law unless they were threatening you. Also, why the domestic language? So it's ok to stop my neighbor from calling 911 but not my family? 609.498 is here https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/sta ... id=609.498 Right now. It sounds like a solution looking for a problem.

Author:	princewally [ Fri Mar 06, 2009 11:52 am ]
Post subject:
Mosin wrote: Right now. It sounds like a solution looking for a problem. True, and "there oughta be a law" is never justification for an actual law being added.

Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive http://www.twincitiescarry.com/forum/

HF1272 Interference with 911, no more guns http://www.twincitiescarry.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=12036	Page 1 of 1

Author:	joelr [ Fri Mar 06, 2009 2:19 pm ]
Post subject:
Mosin wrote: Yea, I don't get it yet. Why the context of the 911 call? All the domestic language (family or household member) I wonder if it's tied to the recent <a href="http://www.twincitiescarry.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11907&highlight">SCOTUS Backing Lautenberg</a> If you're holding someone at gunpoint, what does it matter if you are stopping them from making the 911 call or stopping them from going to the grocery store? You are still breaking the law unless they were threatening you. Also, why the domestic language? So it's ok to stop my neighbor from calling 911 but not my family? 609.498 is here https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/sta ... id=609.498 Right now. It sounds like a solution looking for a problem. A suspicious mind might think that this is an attempt to make interfering with a 911 call a Lautenberg offense, and that the notion of a three-year ban is just camouflage for an intention of making such a ban permament; like you, I have a suspicious mind.

Author:	kimberman [ Fri Mar 06, 2009 3:11 pm ]
Post subject:
Most DV misdemeanors in Minnesota are THREE-year ban crimes. They want to make this a LIFETIME ban. The radical Minnesota Feminists want to make EVERYTHING a lifetime ban on firearms ownership. Another incident of gratuitous nastiness against men.

Author:	singhcr [ Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:17 am ]
Post subject:
My friend is lucky this bill did not pass when he was married. He was going through a divorce, and had a restraining order issued against him by his wife. He drove by the apartment (that HE paid for) and apparently his wife happened to be in the area. I got a call from him in jail telling me to inform his parents, etc. For that, he can't use a pistol for 3 years. I don't have an issue with the idea, but 3 years is excessive- he should have been able to get his rights back as soon as the restraining order was lifted. Now people want this to be permanent?

Author:	tman065 [ Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:21 am ]
Post subject:
kimberman wrote: Most DV misdemeanors in Minnesota are THREE-year ban crimes. They want to make this a LIFETIME ban. I thought that a DV conviction or OFP finding of DV will get you a federal lifetime ban, IIRC.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/