Minnesota 'common sense' gun proposals are actually nonsense | MinnPost

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

60% : Mokos ended his opinion piece by quoting the Second Amendment but forgot the most important part: "shall not be infringed."
55% : Ultimately, gun rights are Black rights and need to be protected.
50% : Who is in charge of determining what is free speech protected by the First Amendment and what is criminal intent? 2.
49% : What Mokos is wrongly misrepresenting as "background checks" is the proposal for universal background checks.
49% : While gun control advocates may paint this perspective as a "gun nut" conspiracy, we have seen this become a reality in developed nations like Australia, the United Kingdom, and even here in the U.S. through New York City's gun registry.
47% : Firearm seizures should have a much higher standard given our right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.
47% : Many are surprised by the intersections of my identity as Black, a Democrat, and Second Amendment advocate.
46% : When I am asked why I support gun ownership, I am reminded of the important role that guns have played in the fight for civil rights, equality, and social justice.
44% : In response to the Community Voices piece on Jan 20 titled "Minnesota Legislature needs to take action to strengthen gun laws" by Bob Mokos, I would argue that the Minnesota Legislature needs to instead take action to protect the Second Amendment rights of Minnesotans by rejecting so-called "common sense" gun control measures.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.