Minnesota Senate Bill SF667

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/27/25
• Refer: 1/27/25

Caption

Definition modification of crime of violence for firearms crimes

Summary

SF667 amends Minnesota’s definition of “crime of violence” in section 624.712, subdivision 5, which is used in firearms-related laws. The bill updates the list of qualifying felony offenses that trigger that designation, covering a wide range of violent, sexual, drug, property, and public-safety offenses. It also expressly includes attempts to commit any of the listed offenses. The practical effect is to change which prior convictions count as predicate offenses under Minnesota firearms statutes. Because the definition of “crime of violence” is used in firearm possession and related restrictions, the bill would affect people with qualifying felony records, as well as law enforcement, prosecutors, courts, and firearms regulators who apply those rules.

Impact

By revising the statutory definition in Minnesota Statutes section 624.712, subdivision 5, the bill would alter the scope of offenses that are treated as crimes of violence for firearms purposes. That can affect eligibility to possess firearms, enforcement of firearm prohibitions, and related criminal liability tied to prior convictions. The bill does not create a new criminal offense; rather, it changes the legal classification used across firearms laws and potentially other statutes that incorporate this definition.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript, vote tally, or recorded debate on the bill, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from the legislative process provided here. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a public-safety and firearms-regulation bill aimed at clarifying or updating the list of disqualifying offenses. The absence of recorded discussion makes the overall sentiment difficult to assess beyond the bill’s apparent law-enforcement orientation.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the materials provided. In general, bills that expand or refine the definition of a disqualifying violent offense can raise concerns about the breadth of firearm restrictions, the treatment of nonviolent or drug-related offenses, and whether attempts should be included alongside completed crimes. Supporters would likely emphasize public safety and consistency in firearms enforcement, while critics might focus on overbreadth or collateral consequences for people with older felony convictions.