.
Feedback

Update: Why Has State Rep. Alice Hausman's Latest Legislative Video Update Stirred Criticism?

Some critics note what the legislator didn't talk about. The lawmaker doesn't anticipate a vote on her bills.

Update: 

Asked to comment on her critics' questions about not discussing the gun contgrol issue obn her latest video updated, Rep. Alice Hausan told Patch:

  • "We spend no time talking about what we are spending zero time on.  When we do updates, we actually talk about what is happening relating to the priorities before us.  Today (Thursday) that is the forecast and its implications for our budget this year.
  • Though I introduced a bill (on gun control) , that bill is not moving, it will never be voted on, and I am spending zero time on that issue. Opponents are trying to pick a fight and I will not be engaging.  I have too much real work to do."

(Orginal post: Thursday a.m., Feb. 28):

The latest video update from state 66A Rep. Alice Hausman on what is happening at the state Capitol has stirred criticism from some Patch readers for what the DFLer didn't talk about in her report: Her sponsorship of legislation that would establish new gun control restrictions. 

Hausman, whose district includes part of Roseville, talks in her video about what is happening with the state budget and that the Legisature is waiting for a new state revenue forecast.

But she didn't mention sponsoring House File 0242 which creates the new crime of manufacturing, transferring, or possessing large capacity-magazines for firearms. The measure defines  “large capacity magazine” as one that can accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition and would generally bar individuals from possessing "large capacity magazine" guns.

Hausman is also a chief sponsor of another gun control bill, House File 0241, which would ban "the manufacture, transfer and possession of assault weapons. The bill provides procedures for registering or disposing of assault weapons that citizens lawfully possess prior to the effective date of ban." 

Here is a sampling of comments that Patch readers made about Hausman's video update:

Marc Olivier : "Why was there no mention of the House gun control bills? That the House Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee held hearings on bills which call for criminalizing gun owners for the styling, as well as functionality, of the firearms they own, not crimes committed? Why no mention that while this and other bills containing language of registration and bans impacting *only* law-abiding citizens have been carried over for possible inclusion in an Omnibus bill, that the Senate refused to hear any bills concerning any bans, at least in the Judiciary Committee? Why no mention of the proposed House bills abandoning commitment to due process provisions in both the U.S. Constitutiin both the U.S. Constitution and the State of Minnesota Constitution?"

Matt Lundgren:  "It's hard to write bills, present bills, and be a representative. Maybe you should retire if you would rather have a paid lobbyist represent the people of our districts. Your and Heather Martins (of Protect Minnesota) attack on all MN's civil liberties is disgusting. "

Brandon Ramthun: "Your anti guns bills that you didn't write and that you didn't understand were a disgrace. You are so far out of touch with your constituents you aren't only out in left field, you aren't even in the stadium."

Bryan Strawser: "Why was there no mention of the gun control bills authored and introduced by Representative Hausman? These were the bills that were really written by a professional lobbyist from Protect Minnesota whose budget comes from an out of state foundation."

To read Hausman's post and see all the comments it has generated, click on to this link.

Roseville Patch has asked Hausman for comment. But, as of this post, she has not responded. 

Patch will update this story as more information becomes available. 

For Roseville news and information, _subscribe to our free newsletter. Also, like us on Facebook and follow us _on Twitter_

White Feather March 1, 2013 at 08:32 am
I do enjoy wiping smug off an arseho's face, and since my lady was away last night, why not rub salt into his idiocy!
White Feather March 1, 2013 at 08:35 am
Right, we have all the govt facts and your a manipulative liar, as if the fight is over, ROTFLMFAO, ROTFLMFAO.
Saul Alinsky Rule #1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. We know all you have is smoke and mirrors! Sucks when we know your playbook inside and out doesnt it rookie!
White Feather March 1, 2013 at 08:37 am
Your being played poor old petey, wanna be seen dancing at the end of your masters merionette puppet strings some more, try and refute all that government data, we will just compare it to the following Saul Alinsky's rules and laugh at you.
RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. cont
White Feather March 1, 2013 at 08:39 am
RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news.
RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. RULE 10: "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." It is the unceasing pressure that will result in the reaction of the opposition that is essential for the success of the campaign. RULE 11: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. RULE 12: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. RULE 13: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. So let the ridiculing of the myriad of the thousands of the anti gun freaks lies begin!
White Feather March 1, 2013 at 08:48 am
2) Think back on past interactions you have had with the individual you suspect of being a pathological liar.If you can recall instances where the individual has been caught lying, but was unwilling to admit any wrongdoing, he is displaying symptoms of pathological lying.
3) Determine whether the person has been diagnosed with a mental health disorder that has pathological lying as one of its common symptoms. These include: histrionic, narcissistic, antisocial or borderline personality disorder, factitious disorder, confabulation, malingering, delusions, or Ganser's syndrome. If she has been diagnosed with any of these disorders, her pattern of lying may be symptomatic of a more serious mental illness. (as noted in earlier in the blog, its genetic for antis apparently) Read more: How to Spot a Pathological Liar | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/how_8294371_spot-pathological-liar.html#ixzz1wbjbO9Jq
White Feather March 1, 2013 at 09:04 am
As noted in the article, most sadomasochists are supposed intellectuals, book smart people, wow, that describes the snobbish anti gun extremists who claim to be so evolved to the tee!
Acting out their subliminal needs to hurt and dominate. How deevolved you intellectual false prophets are, reverting to core primal human values and needs. http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199909/the-pleasure-pain You should really begin your research into your irrelevant beliefs and then you can demonstrate how you have the right to infer and project your beliefs and how that culminates from your sexual fetishism and sadomasochism upon everyone. Most sadomasochists are harmless to others outside their little circle, the real question is where did your sadomasochism, in conjunction with another as yet undiagnosed mental illness of yours, develop your overpowering need to control everyone else? Pretty sure there is some form of help for your mental disorder (previous yahoo article on the genetic connection) needing to control everyone, but that is only possible if you acknowledge your illness first. cont
White Feather March 1, 2013 at 09:15 am
Of course we cant leave out the obvious demonstration of your stockholme syndrome and the way antis use it to project that they themselves are.
Stockholm syndrome, or capture–bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.[1][2] The FBI's Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly 27% of victims show evidence of Stockholm syndrome.[3] Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes “strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other.”[4] One commonly used hypothesis to explain the effect of Stockholm syndrome is based on Freudian theory. It suggests that the bonding is the individual’s response to trauma in becoming a victim. Identifying with the aggressor is one way that the ego defends itself. When a victim believes the same values as the aggressor, they no longer become a threat. Pretty good description of the weak mindedness of the antis, and their feelings, but since they are on the massive majority not really victims....
White Feather March 1, 2013 at 09:28 am
..it must be some further manifestation of the genetic illness most often manifested in anti gun freaks to project their internal fears of what they truly are, violent, 7 times more violent than regular humans, so as to feel normal. See if an anti can drag everyone else down to their level of perversion, it will validate and make them feel normal, rather sad wouldn't you agree.
This projection, also demonstrates how undeveloped the anti gun freaks brains really are, like a child at best. Having conjured a mythical boogeyman in their undeveloped grey matter, they scream and wail, all while being unable to describe what their under the bed monster looks like, where it is, they just know it is the law abiding gun owner, yet they profess no fear of those most likely to harm them, how sad. Of course since these antis associate so much with being selfish minded sociopaths, the drug abuse is inherently obvious as they guzzle the progressives elixir of prozac/lsd laced koolaide by the tens of gallons because if they arent mentally ill, how else can one rationalize their actions other than the ravings of a drugged out addicted lost soul. Anti gun freaks just hate it when you apply their rule #5 back upon them. RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.
B. Martin March 1, 2013 at 03:28 pm
I recommend that each of you citing the Second Amendment follow through and join the MN National Guard so you can compile with the need to have the well-regulated militia. If you do not wish to join, give up your weapons as you are not serving the aim of the Second Amendment.
White Feather March 1, 2013 at 05:38 pm
Oh darn, the sane people came through and pushed back hard, now to gut the rest of the progressive idiocy and demonstrate people exercising their rights in a constitutional republic! Who is losing now eh Petey?
http://www.twincities.com/ci_22690768/house-gun-bill-focuses-background-checks-weapon-bans
Scott Carlson (Editor) March 1, 2013 at 05:44 pm
I have deleted some comments because they violated our terms of use. Personal attacks are not allowed. We also try to maintain a respectful balance in the comment stream.
Andrew Rothman March 1, 2013 at 10:59 pm
White Feather, nice research! Come volunteer for Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance -- we could use you! volunteer (at) gocra.org
C. Rocke March 2, 2013 at 01:42 am
B. Martin - "serving the aim of the Second Amendment"? I shall quote it to you since you obviously aren't aware of how the 2nd amendment reads: ...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms...."
Where in that does it say only the NATIONAL GUARD, which FYI is a FEDERAL entity, is the "aim" of the 2nd amendment??
C. Rocke March 2, 2013 at 01:43 am
Okay, while I enjoyed White Feather's posts...he/she has way toooooo much time on their hands!! lol :)
White Feather March 2, 2013 at 02:54 am
Its called 9 years of saving files and collected info, and if the blog allowed more characters, would have only taken 10 minutes max instead of oh what about 2 hours in between drinking a few beers (Scottish Ale actually & smoking a robusto Dominican) & chatting on Skype to my friend who now works in Singapore, rather pleasant actually! Would prefer to be on a beach with a line in the water, but cant retire just yet, and then you have these annoying antis, not many of them but they are like roaches, hard to get rid of, so one must make them angry and mad as they will in turn do something absolutely stir crazy stupid in response as it is their nature!
White Feather March 2, 2013 at 03:19 am
Thanks for the invite, but therein is a problem in doing that so must politely decline. Being you are an organization, you have to play by certain etiquette and rules in this so called politically correct environment so as to further provide legitimacy to a larger audience.
I on the other hand am past playing nice to fools and intellectual midgets like the antis, so prefer the ability to be politically incorrect when necessary and out Saul Alinsky the progressives, you cant (the problem). They are not bound by any rules or morals, and like in any issue, you sometimes have to fight fire, with fire. With my having no affiliation to any organization, they cant Saul ALinsky back on you through me to make you "play by the rules"! I am ok with that, plus it is rather fun yanking those idiots chains and watching them squirm! See, even their whacked out claims and insanity must be answered as no response allows them free reign and further emboldens them as having false credibility as no one is challenging them, as if they speak the truth, which they inherently never do. As I didn't develop any of the data (albeit the sarcasm and some simple math is indeed mine), feel free to use whatever you like, lots of links and references to use as you wish. You will do fine, as you and your organization have indeed rocked them onto their heels with your efforts, now give those Git's one last little push to make them trip over themselves yet again!
Shelley March 2, 2013 at 07:51 pm
White Feather, you don't need to play by "etiquette and rules" on Twin Cities Gun Owners & Carry Forum. We also have abandoned "playing nice" with the fools. C'mon over any time.
White Feather March 2, 2013 at 09:34 pm
I think I shall
Marc Olivier March 2, 2013 at 10:37 pm
White Feather, thank you for your work and information, and the construction of your sane, logical, humorous but extremely effective argument. It is inspiring!
White Feather March 2, 2013 at 10:56 pm
Aw poor widdle petey, cant wefute a single thing, such a consistent trend.
So keep on believing a gun is the root cause of violence as sane people dont believe such schizophrenic beliefs as you few antis do. Fact remains, no sane or sober person believes you. You will not dictate when and where ANYONE responds to your spew either. So every time you spin your fantasy, we will be there to remind you and everyone reading your spiels and fantasies, that no sane person believes you. We will drown your line of ka ka in the facts you wont attempt to refute, because you know you can not. That is also THE FIRST AMENDMENT, welcome to reality! Hey was looking at the notes from another site, it appears that even the watered down versions of the Law Abiding Gun Owners Persecution Action put forth by treasonous legislators is taking a beating. Just go back to Jans website where she cant stand facts that dont agree with her multiple mental illnesses she is afflicted with as you will be much happier there with no one calling you out and proving your insane!
White Feather March 2, 2013 at 11:01 pm
Naw, just a hobby, have had this irresistable urge since before I was a Marine to knock snooty off an elitists face whenever the opportunity arose. Use anything you wish but any referenced info must be given credit to the source as the antis love to zing you for not following the rules, but 2 can play that game!
The moderator deleted the references to antis having severe cases of fetishsim and sexual fetishism even though a review of the symptoms of both is indeed and accurate comparison to their repeated actions. Thanks and keep fighting the good fight, you have the anti's on the run up there!
White Feather March 3, 2013 at 01:04 pm
There is one thing that I forgot to mention, a direct challenge to any anti, and it is really simple, what right do they value, they are willing to give up in exchange?
See in the real adult world, compromise is where each side gives something up they value in order to meet in the middle. So will be demanding the antis prove to everyone what rights they have given up in exchange for those 22,417 current gun control laws, and the additional rights they are planning to give up to compromise for the additional gun control laws which 85% dont apply to the bad guys to begin with! After all. gun owners should be held to give up the same amount as the antis have, which is NONE! How can giving up the same amount of rights as the antis have given up be considered unreasonable eh petey?
Marc Olivier March 3, 2013 at 04:22 pm
I reject Rep. Hausman's claim that (gun) bill opponents are the ones "picking a fight." The "we" Rep. Hausman refers to are her fellow legislators. Rep. Paymar, a fellow legislator, has (or intends) to introduce yet another gun control bill. By his own admission, this includes provisions from earlier gun control bills, whether formally introduced or not. 1.) These bills are the means by which gun control advocates "picked a fight" with those already abiding by existing laws. 2.) If legislators do not intend to spend any further time on any gun control bills, why did Paymar hold a news conference to introduce yet another bill, intended to face a House vote? As was pointed out in above responses, gun control advocates have relied heavily on a wave of emotionalism, distortions of facts and statistics, convenient omissions of legal opinions and court decisions, relentless smearing of fellow citizens who contribute to society and tax revenues, and more. At the hearings and on social media, I hear those who loudly and prolifically profess fear of guns and gun owners; while not acknowledging in the slightest that they face far more danger in their own homes, from a broad range of people and things, MOST of which do not include guns or gun owners. Lastly, out-of-state foundations fund lobbying efforts *by local units of government*, to undermine *all* due process rights, as well as the 2nd Amendment: Fence-sitters, pay attention, exercise due diligence, and get involved.
C. Rocke March 4, 2013 at 01:00 am
Hey Noguns Pete, how many chlidren die from gun deaths each year? Recent info shows 96. How about child deaths related to alcohol impaired driving? 211.
As I see it, we should go back to the Prohibition Era if we want to REALLY keep our kids safe. And we know how little crime we had during that timeframe...
White Feather March 4, 2013 at 01:03 am
We will give up as many rights as you do petey, NONE!
Uh why is it that what you have, isnt people, its imported money and anti gun coordinators and your representative let an out of state anti gun freak write and present this legislative POS? Wow, thats what you call more and more people, ROTFLMFAO, ROTFLMFAO, ROTFLMFA, its all right petey, we understand you are programed to repeat only that which you are told to say, such a good little drone you are. Besides, it appears your concience is getting to you finally, if you dont want more deaths in gun free victim disarmament zones then repeal the law you created allowing killers to kill at will in your wetdream fantasy zones. 60 of the last 61 incidents occureed in your gun free victim disarmament zones you created, yet overall violence is going down, and down, and down, and down, and down, and down, and down, and down all while migrating to your wetdream paradise killing zone all because you let them. Then again, progressives dont care about reducing violence, its all you have to spread the pathological lie that gun control of the law abiding reduces violence by the bad guys. Have a good evening child killer petey!
White Feather March 4, 2013 at 01:09 am
Lets use government data and compare someone supposedly safe, a doctor, to the chance of your children being killed by an accidental firearm discharge.
CDC Death Data 1930's, over 3,000 accidental deaths by firearm discharge CDC Death & Data 2010 835 deaths by accidental firearm discharge, right at 107 age 0-18 yrs old.http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/deaths_2010_release.pdf US Census 1930's 112.8 milUS Census 2010 312 milBATF 1930 TO 2009 150 Million more firearms in civilian handsJAMA http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/286/4/415 700,000 doctors in US kill 44,000 to 195,000 by medical malpractice every year or .065 to.278 per physician. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/254341.php Since kids = 1/3 of population, will adjust deaths to reflect = 13,200 to 65,000 deaths. (0188 to .0926)107 / 80,000,000 = .0000037 deaths per 80 mil gun owners Physician is .0188 or .0926 /.000000126 = 5,081 to 25,027 times more likely to harm your child than they being accidently harmed by a lawfully owned firearm and that is only in homes with a firearm, ah wow, thats soooooooo scarey, well, to an idiot maybe its scarey! Oh wait, you are an idiot!. So where is the risk from law abiding gun owners and why aren't you antis crying to ban doctors? Actually anyone taking their child to a doctor should have Child Protective Services called on them for risking their child’s lives so frivolously.
White Feather March 4, 2013 at 10:00 am
You just arent smart enough to recognize your solutions dont fix anything, hence making it a waste of time, energy, and resources all to make you feel good while doing nothing constructive to reduce violence, that is truly sad and pathetic at the same time!
Oh wait, thats right, you dont really care about reducing violence, or protecting children, otherwise you would propose solutions that actually addressed only the bad/crazy guys, which you never do eh child killer petey?
jakedog March 4, 2013 at 05:09 pm
Great job white feather.
You at least do your research unlike these anti moron's. Don't Tread On Me!
White Feather March 4, 2013 at 07:26 pm
Aw, poor widdle nogunspete pulled all its comments, because they dont want to play anymore or the truth hurts too much?
Scott Carlson (Editor) March 4, 2013 at 07:39 pm
Folks, what we are looking for here is respectful discussion and debate. No matter what side of the issue you are on, I am not going allow comments that call anyone a deviant, moron, idiot etc. just because you don't agree with someone on the other side of the issue. Personal attacks, as I have said, are a violation of our terms of use. Please respect the forum.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Roseville Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Richard L. Schwinden March 30, 2013 at 04:29 pm
I would like to thank the MONKEES, Michael Nesmith, Mr. Zero's & Scott C. for the opportunity toRead More write things like this !!!!
ginaunn April 2, 2013 at 11:42 am
this article is the http://www.unn.edu.ng repositories