Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Tue Jul 14, 2020 9:53 pm

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 long gun carry? 
Author Message
 Post subject: long gun carry?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:55 am 
Junior Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:09 pm
Posts: 13
Location: Arlington
I know you can carry any firearm you are legal to own.
But I had a DNR tell me that you can not carry a long gun in a vehicle.
He told me that we can walk downtown with a long gun loaded but have to unload and case if you get in your vehicle.
Does anyone know anything diffrent? :?:


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:58 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 5270
Location: Minneapolis
Sounds like he got it right. You may legally carry an uncased and loaded long gun if you have a MN permit to carry, but you cannot transport one via motor vehicle.

Kind of surprising that he knew that, most LEO's do not, which is why most people do not advise carrying a long gun in public.

To coin a phrase, you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride.

_________________
I am defending myself... in favor of that!


Last edited by DeanC on Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:58 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 10:41 am
Posts: 4468
The transport law specifically allows handguns. While your permit makes the carry of a longarm legal, the Transport statutes do not exempt longarms and thus they will be applied and enforced according to the DNR.

this wasn't covered in your carry class?

_________________
Certified Carry Permit Instructor (MNTactics.com and ShootingSafely.com)
Click here for current Carry Classes
"There is no safety for honest men, except by believing all possible evil of evil men." - Edwin Burke


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:39 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 11:05 pm
Posts: 199
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Heh. I like your avatar.

_________________
"My name is Shosanna Dreyfus. This is the face of Jewish vengeance."


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:33 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
Dean and Paul might be wrong.

This is untested law, and a reading of the law according to the canons would suggest that 624.7181, a criminal statute, takes precedence over 97B, a hunting statute; that "carry" in a public place, in 624.7181, absent a definition in that section, takes its usual and ordinary meaning -- to have on or about one's person.

The thing is, the cops' interpretation has been adopted by the DNR and the AG's office, so if you want to find out if they are right (I suspect they aren't), it'll likely cost you.

Some guy or another, with a book and a forum, said something about test cases being for other people.... :)

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:38 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 10:41 am
Posts: 4468
I hedged quickly with applied and enforced ...

_________________
Certified Carry Permit Instructor (MNTactics.com and ShootingSafely.com)
Click here for current Carry Classes
"There is no safety for honest men, except by believing all possible evil of evil men." - Edwin Burke


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Construction
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:42 pm 
Senior Member

Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 1:19 pm
Posts: 333
97A.021 CONSTRUCTION.
Subdivision 1.Code of Criminal Procedure.A provision of the game and fish laws that is inconsistent with the Code of Criminal Procedure or of penal law is only effective under the game and fish laws.

I can't see how driving around the metro with a loaded AR15 has anything to do with fish and game laws???

https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/statutes/?id=97A.021


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:22 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2006 4:56 pm
Posts: 1109
Funny how something like this situation wasn't spelled out better in the carry law. We shouldn't have to debate what the law reads, It should be spelled out clearly so we don't need "Test cases"


Last edited by JimC on Thu Mar 05, 2009 12:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:48 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:17 pm
Posts: 908
Location: Meeker Co., MN
plblark wrote:
this wasn't covered in your carry class?


:roll:

_________________
1 of 55153
"The attitude of people associating guns with nothing but crime, that is what has to be changed. I grew up at a time when people were not afraid of people with firearms." —Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
Sierra Trading - Firearms Sales, Service and Training


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:51 pm 
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 9:13 pm
Posts: 874
Location: Minneapolis
Does this mean that I can't put my beltfed Browning in a ring mount above my sunroof? Rats! :lol:

_________________
Diesel Boats (and Tube Radios) Forever!


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 6:52 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 10:41 am
Posts: 4468
Roll your eyes all you want. If he was being taught something new about carry by a DNR officer, something has been missed. Perhaps I should have said: What did your instructor say when you e-mailed him about it?

It's a quick but specific section in my classes for a reason. I cover it tight along with hunting with a handgun and bow hunting bear. I mention the definition of a motor vehicle. It's quick but specific because I have friends and neighbors who originally got their permits for hunting purposes and I'd hate to see them inconvenienced over a technicality.

_________________
Certified Carry Permit Instructor (MNTactics.com and ShootingSafely.com)
Click here for current Carry Classes
"There is no safety for honest men, except by believing all possible evil of evil men." - Edwin Burke


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:06 am 
Senior Member

Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 2:43 am
Posts: 371
Location: Anoka, MN
Greg wrote:
Does this mean that I can't put my beltfed Browning in a ring mount above my sunroof? Rats! :lol:


Well, is it unloaded and in a 'locked container?' If so, I think it would count. (The fact that the 'locked container' is a two-piece clamshell cover, and the Browning 'sits' in a quasi-mount is immaterial)

Then again, this is 5AM talk, and I ain't no lawyer.

It WOULD be hilarious, though!


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:12 am 
1911 tainted
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 2:47 pm
Posts: 3045
plblark wrote:
Roll your eyes all you want. If he was being taught something new about carry by a DNR officer, something has been missed...............
It's a quick but specific section in my classes for a reason. I cover it tight along with hunting with a handgun and bow hunting bear. I mention the definition of a motor vehicle. It's quick but specific because I have friends and neighbors who originally got their permits for hunting purposes and I'd hate to see them inconvenienced over a technicality.


OK, I'll add one too. :roll:

The reason I do is based on the following two incidents and not targeting you pblark, well maybe a little. :wink:

I had a student that at the end of my class commented that we had not covered anything on ammunition, even though it was in the video we watched, I had discussed it and he was the one that jumped ahead in my lesson plan and asked what was meant by frangible. So he saw it in a video, I explained it in class and he even asked questions about the topic and then couldn't remember we even covered it? When I mentioned this, he got kinda a blank stare and said, "oh ya".

Just lately I talked to a student, not mine, that had gone through a Minnesota permit to carry class given by another instructor and he did not know what I would consider basics that should be covered in a class. After I answered his questions and we had a short discussion about some other carry information such as renewal info which he said was not covered. Later I just had to ask who he had taken his class from and his answer actually made my jaw drop, I mean I was really actually surprised.

So for you that like to comment on what may not have been covered in another class and you consider it a basic which of course you cover in your class, maybe it wasn't. I cover a lot of material that some instructors think is not necessary, but that may be because they are not experianced in these areas to do so. I also do not cover cleaning a firearm in my Minnesota permit to carry class, I focus on the carry mechanics and legal, after all it is a Minnesota permit class and not a handgun basic class. 8)

Note: Don't bother asking, I will not post who this student took his class from.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:25 am 
The Man
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 5:43 am
Posts: 7970
Location: Minneapolis MN
Well, your call as to what you do or don't say; me, I'm curious, and wouldn't necessarily think less of an instructor if somebody missed something. When I repeatedly see the same questions on what I think is important stuff coming from a given instructors' students (say, what to do after taking the gun out for serious; lawyers' numbers; the runup to an appeal; legal issues around concealment in MN, etc.) or hear about incredibly long digressions (NIBIN, bowling balls, politics) I do draw some conclusions.

_________________
Just a guy.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 8:07 am 
Member

Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 11:56 am
Posts: 28
Location: Rochester, MN
I was told in my class that the purpose of the hunting regulation was to stop poaching from vehicles and that my permit did not exempt me from adherence to that law.

I can't think of a time where you'd need a loaded long gun in your vehicle that you wouldn't be able to load a ready magazine or shells, but I admit I haven't been thinking about that possibility for very long.

_________________
"When do you think the movie began to take itself too seriously? Before or after they shot the flying buffalo with the bazooka?"


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group