Minnesota Dems Reject School Security Bill, Demand Gun Control Instead

So far this session, Republicans in the equally-divided Minnesota House of Representatives have voted in lockstep against Democrat proposals to ban so-called assault weapons and large capacity magazines, along with several other gun control measures being pushed by Gov. Tim Walz and Democrat-Farmer-Labor leadership. 

Those Republicans aren’t just saying “no” to gun bans, though. On Tuesday, GOP House members rolled out a school security bill that would increase spending on security measures and mental health resources, as well as open the door to providing safety funding to both public and private schools. Unfortunately, the plan was shot down almost as soon as it was introduced thanks to Democrats on the House Education Finance committee unanimously voting against the proposal. 

They opposed language included in several portions of the bill and more broadly criticized Republicans for not taking any meaningful action on gun restrictions, such as the proposed assault weapons ban supported by many Annunciation families.

With another committee deadline looming at the end of the week and the end of the legislative session quickly approaching on May 18, the disagreement over school safety funding shows the realities of a tied House and illustrates the stark division between the two parties over how to respond to the Annunciation tragedy. 

Rep. Ron Kresha, the GOP House Education Committee Co-Chair, described the legislation presented Tuesday by his colleague, Rep. Bryan Lawrence, as his party’s answer to the Annunciation parents. In addition to investing $50 million and expanding school security funding for nonpublic schools, which groups like the Minnesota Catholic Conference have long supported, the bill also makes those schools eligible for additional grants and encourages districts to set up anonymous threat reporting lines.

Look, I get that Democrats are ticked about Republicans not going along with their gun ban plans. Still, why not move forward on areas where there is broad agreement? No, the DFL wouldn’t get everything it wanted, but at least schools in the state could pay to install classroom doors instead of having to rely on curtains to keep out any unwanted visitors. 

Instead, Democrats in the state legislature are essentially holding school security measures hostage unless or until they get the gun and magazine bans they desire. 

“I really don’t think we can be having this conversation about school safety and hardening of our schools without being really direct about what we are hardening our schools against — it is guns,” DFL Rep. Sam Sencer-Mura said in committee Tuesday. “It is guns that can hurt a lot of people really quickly.”

Cars, knives, matches and gasoline… all can hurt a lot of people really quickly. More importantly, though, the gun control measures the Demcorats are demanding aren’t going to stop a committed killer from carrying out an attack. The deadliest school shooting in U.S. history was committed by an individual who used handguns, not an “assault weapon.” Banning magazines that can hold more than ten rounds won’t stop killers either. At best, you might force a killer to pause for a second to reload, but you’re not going to prevent an attack from taking place. 

Democrats also took issue with a section of the bill that allows districts to reallocate funding for school counselors and psychologists in favor of security, as well as another part of the bill that aims to roll back restrictions on suspensions for younger kids. 

If the proposal “allows” districts to decide how best to spend those dollars and doesn’t mandate that they yank money from funding for in-school mental health services, I don’t have a problem with that. Frankly, Minnesota lawmakers would be better off separately addressing the shortfall in mental health workers and access to mental healthcare outside the public school systems, but that’s a separate issue from increasing school security. 

As for rolling back restrictions on suspensions, all the bill would have done is allow districts to suspend students in grades K-3 for up to three days with the approval of the superintendent. Should suspensions like that be common? No. Should they be allowed? Absolutely. Unfortunately, there are going to be times where that is the appropriate course of action for schools to take, and it makes no sense that it wouldn’t even be an option. 

I suspect, though, that if the bill floated by the House had contained all of these provisions and an “assault weapon” and magazine ban, the Democrats on the House Education Finance committee would have been happy to vote in favor of the bill. The real sticking point seems to be the absence of gun control measures, and because Republicans won’t go along with a gun ban, Democrats aren’t going to anything to improve the physical security of schools across the state. 

Editor’s Note: The radical left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.

Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.