Democratic Minnesota Governor Tim Walz ignited controversy this week after delivering a profanity-laced condemnation of gun rights while signing a set of executive orders aimed at what he calls “reducing gun violence.” But critics argue that the governor’s real target wasn’t crime — it was the Second Amendment itself, and the rights of law-abiding gun owners.
At a Tuesday press conference, Walz accused Republicans of enabling mass shootings and protecting gun manufacturers. “It’s time to start reporting that it is all bull****,” he shouted at reporters, expressing frustration over the state legislature’s refusal to pass a ban on so-called “assault weapons.” His executive actions include the creation of a new “safety council” and an order requiring insurance companies to turn over customer data related to firearms — a move privacy advocates are already calling invasive and legally questionable.
“We are going to use that data to do the research the federal government is too cowardly to do,” Walz said, claiming the orders will help Minnesota treat gun ownership as a “public health crisis.” He added, “I encourage those insurance companies to get your lawyers… but I can tell you, this thing is rock solid and you’re going to provide it.”
The announcement comes as Walz faces increasing scrutiny over a $1 billion welfare fraud scandal, with multiple state employees accusing his administration of ignoring whistleblower warnings and engaging in systemic retaliation. The scandal has further strained Walz’s political capital, especially following the deadly shooting at Annunciation Catholic School in August, in which a transgender-identified gunman killed two children and wounded 17 others. The shooter posted pro-violence messages online targeting former President Donald Trump.
In another grim turn, Democratic State Rep. Melissa Hortmann and her husband were murdered in June by a former Walz appointee who, according to a letter sent to the FBI, claimed he acted on behalf of the governor himself. The Walz administration has refused to comment on the letter.
Despite the chaos, Walz is doubling down on his gun control crusade — including reviving rhetoric from the 2024 campaign trail, when he was named the Democratic vice presidential nominee. In that campaign, Walz claimed he’d carried “weapons of war” in combat, using the phrase to justify a sweeping ban on what he called “assault weapons.”
But firearms experts and Second Amendment advocates have long disputed that language. As the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) notes, so-called “assault weapons” are semi-automatic, meaning they fire one round per trigger pull, just like most legally owned handguns and hunting rifles. The NSSF explains that the term “assault weapon” is a political label designed to create fear and misunderstanding: “What has incorrectly been termed an ‘assault weapon’ is a semi-automatic firearm… not a machine gun.”
Walz’s plan to force insurance companies to fork over sensitive firearm-related data is also raising red flags about civil liberties and government overreach. Critics point out that such a database could easily be used to target gun owners or justify future restrictions — without legislative approval or due process.
The question emerging now is whether Walz’s executive orders are about safety — or if they’re about control. As the governor pushes aggressive policy moves and inflammatory rhetoric, all under the cloud of an unfolding billion-dollar fraud scandal, Minnesotans and lawmakers alike are left wondering whether their rights are being used as a political distraction.