Legislature(1997 - 1998)
1997-07-10 Senate Journal
Full Journal pdf1997-07-10 Senate Journal Page 2101 SB 141 Message dated and received June 20, stating: Dear President Miller: Under the authority of art. II, sec. 15 of the Alaska Constitution, I have vetoed the following bill: HOUSE CS FOR CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 141(FIN) am H An Act relating to permits to carry concealed handguns; and relating to the possession of firearms. This bill makes changes in Alaskas concealed handgun permit program. The current law strikes a thoughtful and carefully crafted balance between an individuals right to protection and the safety of all Alaskans. Many of the changes to existing law in this bill made at the end of the legislative session were neither carefully considered nor intended. The bill would limit the effectiveness of Alaska police departments and the Alaska State Troopers because a hastily drafted amendment prohibits officers from carrying a concealed weapon unless they are certified as peace officers by the Alaska Police Standards Council or they have obtained a permit as a private citizen. This amendment presents several thorny problems. First, the Council does not certify 1997-07-10 Senate Journal Page 2102 SB 141 peace officers; rather, it certifies police officers. This means that many peace officers, such as court security officers who transport prisoners, would not be able to carry a concealed handgun. Second, there is a probationary period for police officers of at least 14 months before they are certified by the Council, during which period the police officer could not carry a concealed handgun. Third, police agencies in small communities often do not require their officers to be certified by the Council. Thus, these officers would not be able to carry a concealed handgun. And finally, people who are specially commissioned for undercover police work would not be able to carry a concealed handgun. While the Legislature may not have intended this result, this bill effectively removes the ability of law enforcement administrators to manage personnel. The bill would allow concealed handguns to be carried into places where common sense says they simply should not be allowed: police departments, airports, Alaska Marine Highway vessels, government offices and, particularly problematic, facilities providing services to victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. The Legislature attempted to deal with the last category by adding to the weapons misconduct statute the prohibition of carrying a concealed weapon into a domestic violence or sexual assault shelter that receives funding from the state. However, it would be legal to carry a concealed weapon into federally or locally funded shelters and into buildings offering domestic violence programs. Not only does this raise constitutional fairness questions, but enforcement would be very difficult because the state would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person who entered the shelter knew or should have known it was state funded. During the legislative debate, it was claimed that although the bill would allow concealed handguns to be carried where current law prohibits them, buildings could be posted with signs prohibiting concealed weapons, and persons who violate the posted signs could be arrested for criminal trespass. While this is true for private buildings that are not open to the public, it is not true for public buildings such as the legislature, police departments, and government offices. Further, quasi-public areas, such as commercial establishments and shopping malls, are usually treated like public 1997-07-10 Senate Journal Page 2103 SB 141 buildings under the criminal trespass laws. Under current law criminal trespass in a public place is committed only after the person carrying the handgun is personally asked to leave the premises and refuses to do so. This bill clearly does not provide the people who work and do business in public places with adequate protection. In attempting to make it easier to obtain a concealed handgun permit, I believe the bill sweeps too broadly, and as a result allows people who are potentially dangerous to obtain or keep a permit to carry a concealed handgun. People who are indicted and not yet convicted for violent felonies may obtain a permit. People who are mentally ill and under medication, although not formally institutionalized, may obtain a permit as may people who have recently undergone voluntary treatment for alcohol or drug abuse. People who have been convicted of assault on certain household members may obtain a permit as well as those violating certain restraining orders. It is unwise to allow potentially dangerous people to carry concealed handguns. The bill does cure two of the problems I expressed last year when I vetoed similar legislation. This bill does not permit carrying guns in bars and would require a carrier consume no alcohol in restaurants that serve alcohol. The bill also creates a safer reciprocity provision that would allow out-of-state residents to carry concealed handguns in Alaska, as long as their home state requirements are as strict as Alaskas. Unfortunately, these fixes are clearly outweighed by the serious problems the bill creates. Many organizations and individuals have voiced strong opposition to this legislation, including the Alaska Chiefs of Police, the Alaska Peace Officers Association, the Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault and domestic violence shelters all across Alaska. Their experience and concerns, in addition to my own, make a veto necessary in the interest of public safety. Sincerely, /s/ Tony Knowles Governor