This past week, news outlets covering the capitol reported on progress, or the lack of it, on the desire some folks have to address the accessibility of guns to people who ought not have them. So far, about six weeks after a gunman took the lives of two innocent children and injured 30, no news is not good news.
Last week, Gov. Tim Walz endured the difficult task of taking back some of the bold comments he made last month regarding calling a special session of state lawmakers to address gun violence. Walz was a little too quick, a bit too emotionally charged when he said he would call lawmakers back to St. Paul with or without a proposal to address the issue.
House Speaker Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring, said the House members wanted bills to review. She said showing up for a special session with no bill to consider is not how special sessions are operated in Minnesota. She’s correct.
But that doesn’t mean DFLers and the GOP are off the hook. The two sides still need to craft a bill both sides can support and vote for without holding their noses so tightly they choke. Generally, and stereotypically, DFLers want to control the kinds of guns people can possess and Republicans want to limit controls and focus on mental health.
Hey folks – you can have it both ways.
We can craft laws limiting who can possess weapons most commonly used for assaulting, killing others. We can also write legislation intended to keep firearms out of the hands of people who are not of sound mind. We don’t know why the 23-year-old man, a former Annunciation student attacked the students at the school during an allschool Mass. He took his own life before police stopped him from killing more children.
Perhaps some form of enhanced red flag laws might have allowed someone to start the wheels turning to prevent him from using a legally-acquired handgun, rifle and shotgun to murder two children and injure dozens more. The man didn’t use the assault-style weapons we all too often hear are used in mass shootings.
As has been previously stated in this space, there must be a way for state lawmakers on both sides of the ideological divide to work together to craft legislation to address the availability of guns to people who are not fit to possess them as well as limit access to the types of guns and accessories that serve no purpose other than assaulting others.
To suggest there is no way to craft this legislation and present it to Minnesotans is to accept there will be another mass shooting and resign oneself to it happening. There have been polls conducted indicating support for bans on assault weapons and highcapacity magazines. We have a red flag law passed in 2023.
We as a society are way too fascinated with guns. Turn on the nightly news or check out a daily newscast – guns are way too often the remedy for disputes.
But everyday life isn’t an episode of the 1980s TV show, the A-Team, the action drama where a collection of former special forces soldiers uses their expertise to help the little guy overcome the oppressor who had all the advantages. Each show featured a gun battle where seemingly thousands of shots were fired and plenty of small blasts never seemed to seriously hurt anybody and good triumphed over evil. Last month, 1,150 deaths in the United States were attributed to gun violence, according to Gun Violence Archive. In 2024, over 400 Minnesotans took their own lives using guns and an additional 148 died via homicidal gun violence, according to Protect Minnesota, a coalition of 16 statewide groups committed to working together to prevent gun violence since 1991.
As we’ve said before, nobody here is suggesting mentally healthy law-abiding citizens should lose access to their firearms. Yes, we question the need for assault weapons and their accessories.
And we ask what will it take for lawmakers like Rep. Terry Stier, Rep. Kristi Pursell, Sen. Rich Draheim and Sen. Bill Lieske and their colleagues to come together to find a way to make progress limiting gun violence.
In the wake of the shootings at Annunciation, if not now – when?