What's the deal? How can a legislative agenda regarding public safety ("Both parties see rising crime as a must-solve problem," Jan. 30) not include any mention of guns and laws to regulate them better and reduce gun violence?
The vast majority of Minnesotans, including gun owners, favor background check laws that close current loopholes. Yet, once again, bills regarding background checks and Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are not up for consideration.
States that have both these laws in effect show reductions of almost 50% in suicides by gun, domestic violence deaths, and deaths of officers killed in the line of duty. Instead, all the Republican candidates for Minnesota governor favor enacting a "stand your ground" law that would make it easier for someone to kill someone and not be punished. Again, what's the deal?
Minnesota residents deserve better representation, for sure.
Eileen Collard, Minneapolis
Opinion editor's note: For additional context, see "Gun violence, gun laws: What state-by-state comparisons show" (tinyurl.com/gun-law-comparison) at Star Tribune Opinion online.
•••
The opinions voiced by Sens. Paul Gazelka and Warren Limmer in the Jan. 30 article are simply wrong and ultimately counterproductive. Increasing violent crime is a problem nation wide and can't be laid to local policy decisions.