Walz Wants to Make Minnesota Capitol ‘Gun-Free Zone’

I think we’re all in agreement (at least I hope we are) that the assassination of Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband and the shooting of state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife are reprehensible acts of violence that should be punished to the full extent of the law.  

It’s the perpetrator of those heinous crimes who should be punished, though, not Minnesotans who had nothing to do with the attacks. Unfortunately, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz doesn’t see it that way, and in the wake of the shootings at the legislators’ homes, the governor is now calling to make their workplace a “gun-free zone”. 

According to the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, under the current guidelines visitors are allowed to bring firearms onto the capitol complex if they have a Minnesota Permit to Carry that is still valid. Walz told reporters Thursday that the legislature may need to renegotiate the rules.

“I think there’s going to be a conversation, and this will be a broader one, in the legislature and with us of what we can do to provide that kind of security. I think the conversation will come up at the Capitol. I made no bones about it that I think it’s inappropriate that we carry firearms in the Capitol, and I think we have to reassess that,” Walz said.

It’s not just visitors with concealed carry permits who are able to bear arms in the state capitol complex. It appears that the law applies to everyone, including lawmakers and their staff. Walz and his anti-gun cronies would prefer to see everyone disarmed, and while he hope that would prevent an attack, in reality it would simply guarantee that any legislator who was the target of an attempted killer would be unable to fight back. 

We should totally leave lawmakers and others defenseless at a time of heightened threats, right?

Narrator Voice: The threat is not coming from peaceable Minnesota gun owners. https://t.co/Ltrr1zPIgG

— MN Gun Owners Caucus (@mnguncaucus) June 19, 2025

In a follow up post on X, the MN Gun Caucus responded to an Everytown activist who accused the Second Amendment group of ignoring the voilence and wondering “how much blood” the group would need to see before agreeing to a carry ban. ?

A sitting legislator and her husband were just murdered. 

Another nearly assassinated. 

And someone was arrested for threats directed at legislators last night. 

If that doesn’t underline the need for self-defense, what does?

In Minnesota, law-abiding citizens—including legislators—are trained, vetted, and licensed to carry under § 624.714. Their right to do so isn’t just common sense—it’s constitutional.

After Bruen, Heller, and McDonald, there’s no legitimate legal ground to disarm peaceable people in public, let alone in the very place where the laws are made.

And thanks to Worth v. Jacobson, the Eighth Circuit confirmed what we’ve always known: the right to bear arms doesn’t start at 21—and it sure doesn’t end at the Capitol door.

You want to stop threats at the Capitol? Disarming the law-abiding isn’t the answer.You want fewer shootings? Start by going after violent criminals—not by gutting the rights of people who obey the law, take the training, and carry to protect themselves and others.

The blood on the ground isn’t the fault of permit holders. It’s the cost of pretending that signs and feelings will stop bullets. Minnesotans don’t give up their rights because criminals exist. They exercise those rights—so they don’t have to become the next headline.

Now, I’d say if Walz and legislators are willing to staff every entrance to the state capitol and its adjoining buildings with armed guards and magnetometers, that might suffice as a legitimate “sensitive place”. But simply declaring the capitol complex off-limits to lawful gun owners while failing to secure the buildings is, as the MN Gun Owners Caucus argues, patently unconstitutional. 

Honestly, if I were a lawmaker or visitor, I’d still want to be able to carry for my personal protection even if there was a police officer and a metal detector at every entrance. These folks still have to walk to their car at the end of the day, as well as stroll into the capitol in the morning, and a would-be assassin could just wait until their target as emerged from the “gun-free zone” to carry out their attack or try to murder them before they enter the capitol complex.

I get the impulse to “do something” in the wake of this terrible crime, but preventing lawful concealed carry is doing the wrong thing. In fact, I’d like to see some local firearm instructors offer a concealed carry class geared towards lawmakers and their staff. I’m sure there are some legislators who are now very much in favor of the right to bear arms in self-defense, even if they’re not ready to come out of the closet and go public with their newfound respect for the right to bear arms.