Legislature(2001 - 2002)
03/20/2002 01:15 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 242 - CONCEALED HANDGUN PERMITTEES Number 0042 CHAIR ROKEBERG announced that the first order of business would be SENATE BILL NO. 242, "An Act relating to concealed handgun permittees." Number 0098 CAROLYN THOMAS, Staff to Senator Robin Taylor, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, read the following sponsor statement: A statutory revision is needed to further clarify the recognition of concealed handgun permits from other states. The 21st Legislature passed SB 294, a bill sponsored by Senator Taylor, which provided for the recognition of permits from states with permit requirements similar to Alaska, and from states which recognize Alaska's permits. Senate Bill 294 also directed the department of Public Safety to determine which states and political subdivisions grant reciprocity to Alaska permit holders and distribute the list to each law enforcement agency in this state. The department has yet to fully implement this statutory requirement, some 16 months later. This legislation will simplify the process by plainly recognizing all permits issued by other states. In so doing, the burden on the department of having to evaluate all the other states' laws to determine which ones recognize Alaska permits, as well as the subjectivity on the part of the department in determining which other states' statutes are similar to Alaska law will be removed. SB 242 will better serve the public and permit holders. CHAIR ROKEBERG asked whether SB 242 is identical to HB 346. MS. THOMAS replied yes. CHAIR ROKEBERG noted that the House Judiciary Standing Committee has already had a public hearing on HB 346. Number 0275 CHARLES KOPP, Lieutenant; Vice President, Alaska Peace Officers Association (APOA), testified via teleconference. Lieutenant Kopp announced that APOA originally supported SB 242 because of the checks and balances. However, the removal of important screening criteria such as verification of age and eligibility requirements [is cause for concern]; although it takes time to implement the screening criteria, it promotes safety nonetheless. He said the APOA opposes reciprocity to another state if the screening criteria of [that state] isn't equal to or greater than that of Alaska. Number 0454 BRIAN JUDY, Alaska State Liaison, Institute for Legislative Action, National Rifle Association of America (NRA), testified via teleconference. Mr. Judy reminded the committee that he provided fairly lengthy testimony on HB 346, the companion to SB 242, and thus that testimony would stand for SB 242. Number 0510 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ moved that the committee adopt Amendment 1, which reads as follows: "Section 1. Amend AS 18.65.748 to read: Sec. 18.65.748. Permit holders from other jurisdictions considered Alaska permit holders. A person is exempt from the requirements in AS 18.65.710 if the person is a nonresident who is at least 21 years of age, has successfully completed a handgun or firearms safety course, has been subject to a fingerprint-based criminal records search and who has a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun from another state; however, a permit under AS 18.65.710 must be obtained by the end of a 120-day period after entry into the state." REPRESENTATIVES JAMES and COGHILL objected. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ recalled testimony on HB 346 regarding an analogy about driver's licenses. Upon review of the driver's license statutes, Representative Berkowitz discovered that people are allowed to drive in Alaska without an Alaskan driver's license so long as the nonresident is at least 16 years of age and has a valid driver's license issued by another state. However, [a nonresident] must obtain an Alaska driver's license after being in the state for a 90-day period. Therefore, for driver's licenses a minimum age is required and another state's driver's license is recognized for a maximum of 90 days in the state. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ explained that parallel to the driver's license [statute], Amendment 1 would ensure that [nonresidents] comply with Alaska's age standard of 21 [for concealed handguns] and would allow a period of 120 days in the state [before requiring an Alaskan concealed handgun permit]. Representative Berkowitz felt that the concealed handgun permit should be treated as the driver's license is [with regard to nonresidents in this state]. REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH commented that this makes sense. CHAIR ROKEBERG surmised, then, that Amendment 1 adds back some of the provisions that were repealed, and requires [nonresidents with concealed handguns], who stay in Alaska for more than 120 days, to obtain an Alaskan concealed handgun permit. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said he wasn't sure about "the repealer portion," only that he wanted to ensure that these concealed handgun requirements parallel the driver's license statutes. CHAIR ROKEBERG pointed out that people don't have to get fingerprinted to obtain a driver's license. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ reiterated that in order to get an Alaska driver's license, people are required to be 16 years of age whether they are Alaskan or nonresident. Number 0692 REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH inquired about the intent to stay. He posed a situation in which a person with a concealed handgun permit from another state has no intent to stay, but decides to act as if he/she is. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ returned to the driver's license analogy, which requires a nonresident to obtain a driver's license after being in the state for more than 90 days. He suggested that if one is here for more than 90 days, then the individual is going to stay and if not, the individual will be leaving shortly. Therefore, he felt the 120-day requirement in Amendment 1 provided an additional buffer. Representative Berkowitz said he didn't know what would happen if there wasn't an intent to stay. He noted that he would accept [intent to stay] language as a friendly addition to Amendment 1. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES relayed her belief that SB 242 has nothing to do with whether one intends to stay but rather with whether the individual is in the state and has a [concealed handgun] permit from another state. MR. JUDY announced that he opposes Amendment 1 because he views it as unnecessary. He said that people from other states, regardless of whether those states have [concealed handgun permit] processes that are less or more difficult than Alaska's, aren't causing problems in their states and won't cause problems in Alaska. Mr. Judy informed the committee that if the time limitation is included, there is at least one state, Texas, that won't reciprocate and recognize Alaska's permit because Alaska's law would be more rigid than that state's law. Mr. Judy urged the committee to pass SB 242 unamended. CHAIR ROKEBERG asked if it was fair to say that most other states have these provisions [such as those proposed in Amendment 1] in order to obtain a permit. MR. JUDY answered that most states with a specific law require a background check. Most states require fingerprints and training courses. Regardless of the level of the criteria, the empirical data illustrates that permit holders are responsible individuals and aren't causing problems and thus won't cause problems when in Alaska. CHAIR ROKEBERG related his understanding, then, that adoption of Amendment 1 would defeat the purpose of SB 242 because it hampers reciprocity with other states. MR. JUDY answered, "more or less." He remarked, "What we believe ... [is that] self-defense is a fundamental right and the right should not stop at the state borders." Ideally, every state would recognize every other state's permit, which is what SB 242 would accomplish in Alaska. "The more states that we can get to adopt clean bills, clean laws of that type, the easier it's going to be to pass those types of laws in other states; the quicker we can do that, the quicker Alaskans will have their permits recognized by more states," he said. Number 1008 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ clarified that he has never asserted that people with concealed handgun permits are anything other than more law-abiding than the rest of the population. However, there is the consideration of being a sovereign state and the responsibility of exercising independent judgment regarding the best interest of Alaskans. Representative Berkowitz pointed out that [the legislature] decided that concealed handgun permit holders who are Alaska residents have to follow certain requirements; thus it would seem that visitors should follow the same rules. He reiterated the driver's license analogy: those who stay beyond a certain time period must obtain an Alaska driver's license. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said that although she understood Representative Berkowitz's argument, she didn't believe it is [relevant] in this case. She explained: The reason for that is: We put these rules and regulations on our own people, and in order for our own people to have the full protection of being able to go anyplace and take their 'concealed-carry' permit and have it mean anything, ... we have to agree that we're going to have this reciprocal agreement. So, saying this amendment is to protect us ... is false in a way because what [SB 242] really does is allow us to carry [concealed] in other states. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES asserted that if one assumes that these are the "good people" that have these concealed-carry permits, then Alaska has to have a provision that allows reciprocity with each state that allows the same. Representative James noted her opposition to Amendment 1. Number 1158 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ remarked that Representative James's argument invites an equal protection challenge on the grounds that an Alaskan who doesn't qualify for a concealed-carry permit in Alaska may be able to obtain the permit from another jurisdiction, which would be recognized here. Therefore, that individual would be in a different position. Representative Berkowitz explained that he is thinking in terms of what occurs when the aforementioned differential between "our citizens" is created. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES said that [SB 242] is a benefit and recognizes concealed-carry permit holders are law-abiding citizens. She opined that Representative Berkowitz's example is absurd. CHAIR ROKEBERG inquired as to the costs of such a permit in Alaska. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES recalled that her renewal was only $25. CHAIR ROKEBERG indicated that the initial fee is $99. He also indicated agreement with Representative James that someone isn't going to cross state lines to find lower standards to obtain a concealed-carry permit for a $99 fee. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ emphasized that the difficulty with this issue is that it involves guns and thus people focus on the gun part of it rather than the law part. Upon reviewing the law aspect of SB 242, Alaskans are placed in a different posture in their ability to comply with the law. Representative Berkowitz clarified that he has never said that people who carry concealed handguns are completely law-abiding; however, he acknowledged that they are more law-abiding than the general population. Representative Berkowitz said, "I think that the state has a responsibility; when we have laws, regardless of the subject matter, we ought to make sure that those laws are enforced." Therefore, if people wanted to visit Alaska they could do so, but those who stay here have to live by our laws. CHAIR ROKEBERG remarked, "If the length of residency and not fulfilling the duties of a new citizen of Alaska was your intention, you could perhaps modify this amendment and might have greater legs [to stand on]." REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ announced, "I would accept that as a friendly amendment to my amendment." He clarified that he would be willing to amend Amendment 1 such that it would read as follows: "A permit under AS 18.65.710 must be obtained by the end of a 120-day period after entry into the state." REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH commented that he felt that would clarify it. If a person comes to Alaska and stays more than 120 days, then what they bring with them should eventually become Alaskan. CHAIR ROKEBERG recalled Mr. Judy's testimony that there may be some states that run afoul of that. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ said that those states, then, could modify their laws to come into compliance with Alaska. Number 1403 REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ moved to amend Amendment 1 such that it would read as follows: "A permit under AS 18.65.710 must be obtained by the end of a 120-day period after entry into the state." REPRESENTATIVE MEYER objected. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES objected, noting that a number of [seasonal workers] come to Alaska for less than 120 days. She said she interpreted the [amendment to Amendment 1] to [mean] that if that person was here once and returned 120 days later, that person would have to get a local permit. She said she didn't believe it should work that way. Furthermore, obtaining reciprocity is the thrust of this legislation. Although the amendment to Amendment 1 is less onerous than Amendment 1 itself, she said that it remains too onerous for her to support. REPRESENTATIVE KOOKESH expressed concern with Representative James's last comment because it illustrates that she is worrying about people from other states. He said he felt that the worry should be in regard to Alaskans. REPRESENTATIVE MEYER relayed his understanding of Representative James's comments to be that there is a certain amount of trust with regard to other states [with concealed-carry laws] trusting Alaska and vice versa. This legislation protects Alaskans in the sense that other states aren't going to make outlandish requirements on Alaskans traveling through that state. Therefore, he felt that [SB 242] should be left alone unless it is found not to work. Number 1536 MR. JUDY pointed out that with or without "this amendment" regarding the 120-day limitation, Alaska will recognize every state's permits, although only for a limited amount of time. For example, someone from Texas with a permit could come to Alaska and carry a [concealed handgun]. However, because Alaska imposes that restriction on Texas, Texas will not recognize Alaska's permits. Therefore, a permit holder from Texas will still be able to come to Alaska for 120 days, but Alaskans won't receive the benefit of reciprocity. Mr. Judy said that he didn't understand the issue of 120 days because he believes the majority of those coming to Alaska will be present significantly less than 120 days. "To me the whole thing seems to be really a non-issue," he said. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES reiterated her thoughts regarding reciprocity, and said that "any of these kinds of things destroys the intent." REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ asked, "Whose intent?" REPRESENTATIVE JAMES answered: The intent of the sponsor of SB 242. CHAIR ROKEBERG called the question. A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Berkowitz and Kookesh voted for the amendment to Amendment 1. Representatives James, Coghill, Meyer, and Rokeberg voted against the amendment to Amendment 1. Therefore, the amendment to Amendment 1 failed by a vote of 2-4. REPRESENTATIVE BERKOWITZ withdrew Amendment 1. Number 1732 REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to report SB 242 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal note. There being no objection, SB 242 was reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|