Gun News

MN Supreme Court: “Public Place” Includes The Interior Of Your Car ~ VIDEO

ST. PAUL, Minn. — The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that the interior of a motor vehicle on a public roadway qualifies as a “public place” under state law. The decision came after a legal battle over whether a man carrying a BB gun in his car without a permit could be charged under Minnesota’s firearm statutes.

The case, State v. Bee, centered on Kyaw Be Bee, who was pulled over in 2022 by a Ramsey County Sheriff’s deputy. During the stop, the deputy found a BB gun under Bee’s driver’s seat. Bee did not have a permit to carry a firearm in public, and the state charged him with violating Minn. Stat. § 624.7181, which criminalizes carrying a BB gun, rifle, or shotgun in a public place without proper authorization.

A district court initially dismissed the case, ruling that the inside of a private vehicle was not a “public place.”

However, the Minnesota Court of Appeals overturned that decision, and the Supreme Court affirmed the appeals court’s ruling.

The Court’s Reasoning

The state’s highest court determined that the law’s definition of “public place” includes vehicles on public roadways. The ruling pointed to the statutory language, which defines “public place” as government-controlled property and locations regularly open to the public. While private homes, businesses, and hunting areas are explicitly exempt from this definition, motor vehicles are not.

The court further noted that Minnesota’s firearm laws already include exceptions for transporting firearms in vehicles, provided they are cased and unloaded, stored in the trunk, or carried by a permit holder. In the court’s logic, the fact that lawmakers carved out specific transport exceptions indicated that vehicles on public roads were considered public places for the purposes of the statute.

Implications for Gun Owners

This ruling raises concerns among gun rights advocates about potential overreach. Critics argue that treating private vehicles as public spaces erodes individual rights and could set a dangerous precedent. Some fear that this interpretation could be used to justify further restrictions on lawful firearm transportation and possession. Others worry about increased law enforcement scrutiny and potential abuses of search and seizure protections.

“This ruling essentially says that the state can regulate what’s inside your car as if it were a sidewalk or a park,” said one pro-gun legal expert. “That’s a troubling shift in how we define personal space versus public space.”

Supporters of the ruling argue that it simply clarifies existing law, ensuring that individuals carrying weapons in cars without a permit are subject to the same restrictions as those carrying on foot. They emphasize that the ruling does not alter the state’s firearm transport laws but rather enforces them as written.

The MN Supreme Court held today in State v Kyaw Be Bee (A23-1257) that the definition of “public place”
in MN 624.7181, subd 1(c), includes the interior of a motor vehicle on a public roadway.

Read the opinion at: https://t.co/mTu8gPasLB pic.twitter.com/o6l1RQvFwN

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

Next Steps: Legislative Fix?

Gun rights advocates are already calling for legislative action to counteract the court’s decision. Since the ruling hinges on statutory language rather than constitutional interpretation, the Minnesota Legislature has the power to amend the law and explicitly exclude vehicle interiors from the definition of “public place.”

“This is something that can and should be fixed through legislation,” Rob Doar is Senior Vice President, Government Affairs for the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus.said. “We need to make sure that gun owners aren’t unfairly targeted just because they’re inside their own cars.”

For now, Minnesota residents should be aware that carrying a BB gun, rifle, or shotgun inside a vehicle without meeting the legal transport requirements could result in criminal charges.

The Irony of the Case

As an aside, the case’s title—State v. Bee— and the defendant’s name, “Kyaw Be Bee,” have not gone unnoticed by observers, given that it involves a BB gun. “You can’t make this stuff up,” one commentator quipped.

With this ruling, Minnesota gun owners and civil rights advocates will likely keep a close eye on any legislative responses or further legal challenges that might arise.