Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is pushing hard for an “assault weapons” ban this year, using his political influence to try to get the issue onto the legislative floor. Walz has accused Republicans of refusing to compromise because GOP leaders told him they would never allow a vote on a gun ban if lawmakers return to the statehouse.
Speaking to reporters, Walz said, “I was told by Republican leadership that there would never be a vote on a gun ban, and that’s not acceptable in reaching a compromise. It’s clear to me that Republican legislators want to talk about everything else except guns.”
But many people are questioning what Walz means by “compromise.” Banning firearms that are widely owned and legally used by citizens doesn’t sound like middle ground to opponents, who wonder what, if anything, Walz could offer in return to persuade Republicans to go along. Some speculate that Walz may be trying to pressure Republicans by tying their school security proposals to gun control measures. If true, critics argue this would be deeply unfair, especially since many school districts urgently need upgrades to keep their campuses safe.
Walz also hasn’t addressed resistance within his own party. Some Democrats are not in favor of a broad gun ban, a reality Republican leaders are quick to highlight. House Speaker Lisa Demuth, a Republican from Cold Spring, suggested Walz may be twisting the facts. She explained that even Democratic leaders admit there aren’t enough votes to pass a ban in the legislature.
Demuth said, “I did not say there would never be a vote — but you need a bill in order to vote, and the governor has given no language or detail of what he wants voted on aside from vague bans. If he is serious about wanting a vote, he should be honest about what he’s actually looking for instead of playing politics to further his campaign.”
Walz has asked for a floor vote on both “high-capacity” magazines and so-called assault weapons, urging lawmakers to simply vote their conscience. “If they believe that’s a bad idea, which obviously they do, then you can simply vote no,” he said. But his proposal remains short on details, leaving key questions unanswered. What does he consider a “high-capacity” magazine? Would owners be forced to modify or give up the magazines they already legally possess? Would there be exemptions, or would existing owners be criminalized?
The same uncertainty applies to the term “assault weapons,” which is often used broadly in political debates but defined differently depending on the law. Walz has not explained how he defines these firearms, nor what he would do about the large number of legally owned AR-15s and other semi-automatic rifles in the state.
For critics, these missing details highlight a bigger problem: Walz has not yet called a special legislative session, nor has he provided a clear policy framework. Instead, they argue, he is focusing on messaging, delivering talking points that echo national gun control groups while offering no concrete legislative solutions.
The debate comes in the aftermath of the tragic shooting at Annunciation Church in Minneapolis, which reignited calls for stronger gun laws. Walz is positioning himself as a leader on the issue, but without clear proposals or bipartisan support, his push for an assault weapons ban faces an uphill battle. For now, the governor’s remarks have sparked more questions than answers, leaving many Minnesotans uncertain about what exactly he is asking lawmakers to vote on.
