‘Most chilling’: Lawmaker wants green light for government to invade homes of gun owners

Democrats and other leftists in Minnesota are working again this year on imposing a long list of new demands on those citizens who want to exercise their Second Amendment rights by owning a gun, including a stunning new requirement that gun owners open their homes for government inspections.

The state long has pushed for fences around the Second Amendment to keep citizens from having and owning firearms, and the agenda has been elevated in recent months because of a shooting at Annunciation school, where students Harper Moyski and Fletcher Merkel were shot and killed, apparently by Robin M. Westman, 23, a gunman who earlier had claimed to be transgender.

Westman died by suicide to end the shooting, which injured more than a dozen others.

Minnesota’s Democrat-Farm-Labor party has considered gun restrictions as a top issue since.

Gov. Tim Walz, who reportedly was forced into an announcement that he will retire and not seek further office by a scandal involving billions of dollars in social services program fraud in his state’s Somali-immigrant community, had wanted a special legislative session at the time of last year’s shooting but an agreement never developed.

DFL lawmakers want bans on “assault” weapons, gun magazines, firearms of .50 caliber or larger and more.

Walz not only wants new regulations, but new, and very high, taxes on weapons.

Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley pointed out in his column that Democrats all across the country are moving to ban popular guns.

“That includes, most recently, Virginia, which has careened to the left after the election of Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D),” he said.

But, he confirmed, the “most chilling” plan likely is in Minnesota where state Sen. Matt Klein has proposed a ban on semiautomatic rifles and magazines with more than ten bullets – and he wants authorities to have permission to enter any home for the purpose of inspecting gun storage and safety procedures.

Gun owners refusing that permission would not be allowed to keep banned weapons they already have, he said.

He noted the Supreme Court hasn’t yet ruled on such bans, and while they have been adopted at the state level sometimes, many believe they are unconstitutional.

“We have a Second Amendment protection of gun ownership, with over 490 million guns in private hands, as of 2022. In 2008, the Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, recognizing the Second Amendment as encompassing an individual right to bear arms. The Supreme Court further strengthened the right in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen,” he explained.

He noted the AR-15 rifle, a target in Minnesota’s scheme, is the most popular gun in America, and they are purchased “for personal and home protection” as well as “target shooting and hunting.”

It’s popular because it is modular and has accessory options.

He noted the law states in addition to state permits and certifications, owners must agree, to keep weapons that they already have, “to allow the appropriate law enforcement agency to inspect the storage of the device to ensure compliance with this subdivision.”

The proposal, which is facing opposition from House Republicans in the state, would impose an outright ban on a long list of common weapons, as well as any with the same “design” as those listed models.

And it bans those with any of a multitude of features, like a “protruding grip,” a “thumbhole stock,” “fixed magazine capacity in excess of ten rounds” and more.

Those who already own guns that are being targeted would be required, if they want to “maintain lawful ownership or possession,” to go through a certification process, store it “safely,” and “agree to allow the appropriate law enforcement agency to inspect the storage of the device to ensure compliance with this subdivision.”

Further, use of such weapon would be allowed “only on property owned or immediately controlled by the person, while engaged in the legal use of the device at a duly licensed firing range, or while transporting the item in compliance with applicable law.”

For “semiautomatic military-style weapons,” the only transfer allowed is “to the appropriate law enforcement agency for the purpose of surrendering the item for destruction.”

Those who inherit such weapons would be allowed 120 days to surrender it, make it unworkable, or remove it from the state.

The Democrats’ threat is a $25,000 fine for offenses. Or five years in jail. Or both.

Owners of such weapons also would be banned from obtained a second.