Skip to main content Skip to office menu Skip to footer
Capital IconMinnesota Legislature

Legislative News and Views - Rep. Michael Paymar (DFL)

Back to profile

Michael Paymar: Minnesota Legislature: A failure to act on background checks for gun purchases

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

The legislative session concluded, sadly, with very little progress on preventing gun violence. I'm disappointed that legislators didn't have an opportunity to vote, or even debate, sensible gun control measures like background checks.

It is not surprising the public is cynical about politicians and political parties. Every year, 12,000 people die from firearm homicides and 18,000 more from firearm suicides, and yet, our elected officials continue to abdicate their responsibilities.

After the unimaginable massacre of 20 children at Sandy Hook and the shootings at Accent Signage in Minneapolis, a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, a movie theatre in Aurora Colorado, a political gathering in Arizona, a college campus in Virginia, a high school in Colorado, and the random shooting in Oakdale -- not to mention the thousands of gun deaths in our cities -- I thought we had reached a tipping point.

During this past legislative session, the House Public Safety Committee held hearings. We listened to hours of emotional testimony from many people, including gun violence victims and gun owners who believe that any legislation would infringe upon Second Amendment rights. The hearings were informative, demonstrating that preventing mass shootings and reducing gun violence in our communities are both challenging and complex.

We can't ignore the high rates of domestic violence that result in tragic homicides. We can't ignore the conditions that give rise to gang activity and

 

violent crime. We can't ignore the glorification of violence as a means to settle conflicts. And, we can't ignore the fact that far too many people who should be disqualified from possessing firearms have easy access to them.

I authored the Gun Violence Prevention Act. This legislation would have given law enforcement the ability to deny a permit to purchase handguns or semi-automatic military-style assault weapons if the applicant was determined to be a danger to self or others. The bill would have tightened up laws on "straw purchases" of firearms that often end up in the commission of crimes. The centerpiece of the bill was universal background checks -- extending checks to gun-shows, Internet sales and private sales. Sales to relatives and hunting rifles were excluded.

Since the Brady Gun Control Act was enacted in 1994, nearly 2 million people disqualified from possessing firearms -- people convicted of a felony, domestic abuse or civilly committed -- have been denied access to firearms after a background check. However today, 40 percent of handguns and semi-automatic military-style assault weapons are purchased without background checks because they are considered private sales. My bill would have plugged this loophole.

The NRA and its affiliate organizations claim that background checks are an infringement on Second Amendment rights. They claim that background checks won't prevent crime or mass shootings -- that only law-abiding citizens will be inconvenienced. If that's the case, then perhaps we shouldn't require background checks on any purchase of a firearm. If you want an AR-15, AK-47 or a handgun, just buy one, no questions asked. But in 1999, after the mass shooting at Columbine High School, the NRA's leader, Wayne La Pierre, told Congress, "It's reasonable to provide mandatory instant background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes for anyone." What has changed?

The Supreme Court has been clear: Reasonable gun restrictions do not infringe on the Second Amendment. Polls show that 70 percent to 80 percent of Minnesotans support background checks -- Democrats, Republicans, metro and rural. The Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, neighborhood groups ravaged by gun violence and Gov. Dayton all support background checks.

Gun violence prevention advocates need to build organizations as powerful as the NRA. In the future, politicians in Washington and St. Paul must be as concerned about their ratings from gun violence prevention advocates as they are with their NRA scores.

Also, upon reflection, I wonder if there is room for dialogue and common ground between both sides on this volatile issue. I was vilified by some for my advocacy for gun control. But, when I had chance to talk to gun-rights folks face to face and with my legislative colleagues (especially from rural districts), we found areas of commonality. We all care about our children's wellbeing. We all want to keep firearms out of the hands out of people who shouldn't possess them. We all want our communities to be safe places. Is it possible to end the demonization of each other? Is it possible to listen to different perspectives? We can and must find solutions to prevent gun violence.