Legislature(2023 - 2024)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/30/2024 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB193 | |
| SB208 | |
| HB316 | |
| SB229 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 265 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 316 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 229 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 293 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 208 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 193 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 229-GUN VIOLENCE PROTECTIVE ORDERS
4:21:09 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO.
229, "An Act relating to gun violence protective orders;
relating to the crime of violating a protective order; relating
to a central registry for protective orders; relating to the
powers of district judges and magistrates; amending Rules 4 and
65, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure, and Rule 9, Alaska Rules of
Administration; and providing for an effective date."
4:22:15 PM
SENATOR LOKI TOBIN, District I, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, sponsor of SB 229, acknowledged that this
legislation is contentious and raises questions around second
amendment rights. She emphasized that infringing on Alaskans'
second amendment rights is not her intention. However, she is
interested in considering the way second amendment rights
interact with public safety.
4:23:03 PM
SENATOR TOBIN said SB 229 is concerned with health and public
safety issues that need to be addressed with policy changes. She
pointed out that Alaska has the highest rate of youth suicide
and domestic violence. She said that extreme risk protection
orders have been proven to help reduce the impacts of these -
and hopefully save lives. She acknowledged that this is not a
silver solution; however, extreme risk protection orders have
been used in 21 others states to keep citizens safe. In one
state, the extreme risk protection legislation has been in place
for over a decade and has not been ruled unconstitutional or
enjoined - and has kept people from hurting themselves and/or
others. She shared her personal experience living in rural
Alaska and losing classmates to suicide by gun. She pointed out
that in states that have passed similar legislation, there has
been an up to 13.5 percent reduction in suicide, which is equal
to 9-16 Alaskans. She said that while this may not seem like a
lot, this number equals the number of classmates that she lost.
4:24:58 PM
SENTOR TOBIN opined that SB 229 is a reasonable pathway forward
that provides protections, stipulations, and guardrails - and
would prevent people from utilizing these protective orders in
an abusive manner. She surmised that there is ample opportunity
for someone to petition the courts if they are at risk of having
their firearms taken - and there are pathways to have firearms
returned after a period of time. She noted that the timeframes
are outlined in SB 229. She stated that, while some legislation
is directed toward helping victims, this legislation would help
prevent people from becoming victims. She shared that she has
family in law enforcement in Alaska and briefly discussed their
role in public safety - as well as the importance of her role as
a legislator in crafting legislation to aid and protect law
enforcement. She noted that the 2022 bipartisan safer community
act set aside $750 million for state and local implementation of
extreme risk protective orders, which would provide funding for
the changes made by SB 229. She said that, across the country,
extreme risk protection orders prevent 50-100 people from
accessing firearms that would potentially be used to harm
themselves or others.
4:27:45 PM
LOUIE FLORA, Staff, Senator Löki Tobin, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented the sectional analysis
for SB 229. He explained that Section 6 creates "ex parte gun
violence protective orders," which would allow a police officer
to request an ex parte gun violence protective order. If the
court finds that the petition establishes probable cause to
believe the respondent is dangerous, the court can issue a
protective order without notice. He added that this section
defines how the order would be created. He said that SB 229
creates a new section for gun violence protective orders (AS
18.65.815) - this allows a police officer to file a petition for
a protective order.
MR. FLORA said that AS 18.65.825 applies to the modification of
a gun violence protective order and allows police officers or
the respondent to request changes to the order. AS 18.65.830
addresses the surrender of firearms and ammunition and allows
the court to order the respondent to temporarily surrender or
sell all firearms and/or ammunition within 48 hours of receipt
of the protective order. When the protective order is terminated
or expires, law enforcement shall inform the respondent that
their firearms and ammunition are available. AS 18.65.835 and AS
18.65.840 describe the service of process and enforcement for
the protective order.
4:29:48 PM
MR. FLORA continued his sectional analysis of SB 229. He said
that AS 18.65.845 defines "household member" for the purposes of
establishing a gun violence protective order. Section 7 adds a
conforming amendment to the existing powers of district judges
and magistrates allowing them to administer the gun violence
emergency protective order. The remaining sections include
indirect court rule amendments and conditional effects and
effective date.
4:30:50 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN asked for clarification regarding the court
ordering the respondent sell their firearms. He asked how this
works with the court ordering the respondent to surrender their
firearms.
4:31:49 PM
SENATOR TOBIN replied that the respondent has two options: to
surrender their firearms or to sell their firearms.
4:32:11 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI announced invited testimony on SB 229.
4:32:58 PM
CHRISTOPHER CARITA, representing self, Fort Lauderdale, Florida,
testified by invitation on SB 229. He gave a brief overview of
his career in law enforcement and said that, for the past five
years, he has been utilizing gun violence restraining orders
(GVRO) successfully to intervene in crises by temporarily
removing firearms from dangerous situations. This has prevented
potential shootings and gun suicides. He said that while working
as a detective, he received his master's degree in public health
with a focus on violence prevention.
MR. CARITA shared a story to illustrate the potential lifesaving
benefits of GVROs. He reiterated that he has used GVROs to
prevent gun suicides and to remove firearms from violent
domestic situations. He said that this has provided time for
families to heal and for victims to reach safety. He stated that
he has utilized GVROs at schools, workplaces, and in the
community.
4:35:59 PM
MR. CARITA said that most of the cases are not contentious. He
added that respondents and their families are ultimately
grateful for the intervention. He stated that GVROs have
significantly decreased the number of gun violence tragedies
that he has attended as law enforcement officer. He encouraged
passage of SB 229 which would prevent gun violence deaths in
Alaska.
4:37:13 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI said there are concerns about the due process
with respect to GVROs. He pointed out that in SB 229, "household
members" could include ex-partners and offered an example in
which someone uses a GVRO to take their ex-partner's guns. He
asked how the GVRO process works in Florida.
4:38:04 PM
MR. CARITA replied that typically, law enforcement responds as
the crisis is unfolding. He briefly explained the process for
acquiring a GVRO in Florida, which includes a sworn affidavit
accompanied by any supporting evidence, and testimony before a
judge (under oath) in order to obtain the order. He emphasized
that anyone giving false evidence (including law enforcement)
would result in jail time (and loss of employment). He went on
to explain that a hearing is held within two weeks of the
emergency GVRO being granted and firearms relinquished -
respondent and law enforcement present evidence to the judge,
who decides whether to implement the full protection order.
MR. CARITA explained that GVRO lasts for up to one year, during
which time the respondent can contest the order. He reiterated
that the majority of cases are not contentious; rather, the
respondent has cooperated, acknowledging that they are in
crisis. He noted that Florida has a process in place to connect
those individuals with agencies to provide additional
assistance. He stated that a family member (or ex-partner) would
also be required to provide evidence and a sworn affidavit - the
standard and consequence remain the same. He pointed out that
this is not something that has been an issue in Florida - with
domestic violence restraining orders or GVROs. He opined that
there are more efficient ways to get back at one's partner.
4:42:37 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI asked how long Florida has had risk protection
orders (RPO) and if there have been occasions when law
enforcement determined RPO was not warranted.
4:42:55 PM
MR. CARITA replied that the agency uses RPOs judiciously and
added that in Florida an RPO violation is a felony. He explained
that Florida's RPO law was created in the wake of the Parkland
school shooting and thus has a high consequence. As a result, it
is used less often, with law enforcement turning to other
interventions before seeking RPO (which are seen as a last
resort). He said that law enforcement has begun investigations
and determined that there are more effective ways to mitigate a
problem - and in some cases discovered that the threat was not
as it initially appeared.
4:45:01 PM
KRYSTAL LOPILATO, Senior Policy Counsel, Every Town for Gun
Safety, New York, New York, testified by invitation on SB 229.
She gave a brief overview of her organization. She stated that
when someone is in crisis and is a risk to themselves or others,
they often exhibit warning signs; however, there are not always
tools available to take preventative action based on these
signs. She stated that extreme risk laws empower law enforcement
and loved ones to intervene, by asking a court to temporarily
prevent someone in crisis from accessing firearms. She said that
these laws can help deescalate emergency situations and are a
critical tool for preventing tragedies before they occur. SB 229
provides several steps in support, preceding each with due
process protections commensurate with the potential order that a
judge could issue. She pointed out that 21 states and the
District of Columbia have similar extreme risk laws in place.
She added that these have been routinely upheld by the courts
(including newer second amendment analysis).
MS. LOPILATO stated that extreme risk laws are not new or
radical - and federal funding is available for states to
implement these kinds of crisis intervention tools. A national
extreme risk protection order resource center was recently
launched. Many states are focusing on extreme risk laws - which
are proven to save lives. She stated that SB 229 includes both
law enforcement and family members as potential petitioners and
opined that this provides a balance, as both are uniquely
situated. Some families may not want to involve law enforcement
(or may be in rural areas where access to law enforcement is
limited) and this empowers them to seek help from the court. She
explained that this is one reason many states include this
pathway for families to petition the court. She stated that GVRO
laws save lives. She pointed to the high rate of gun suicides in
Alaska and said that research has shown a decrease in gun
suicides in states with similar laws in place.
4:49:40 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI opened public testimony on SB 229.
4:50:18 PM
AOIBHEANN CLINE, State Director, National Rifle Association
(NRA), Fairfax, Virginia, testified in opposition to SB 229.
She said that gun confiscation orders strip an individual's
constitutional rights - and their firearms - without due process
of law. She briefly described how the United States constitution
conflicts with SB 229. She expressed concern about the ex parte
protection order. She asserted that this legislation is
unnecessary and directed attention to Alaska's civil commitment
laws. She opined that SB 229 is improperly focused on firearms
rather than the dangerous individual. She asserted that this
legislation is a red herring with no supporting evidence. She
offered data to support this argument. She argued that SB 229
creates dangerous confrontation situations and invites abuse.
She asserted that this is groundwork for further gun control in
Alaska incentivized by federal funding and overreach.
4:53:31 PM
DIANE DESLOOVER, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 229. She said that this legislation is vital and
aimed at preventing gun violence in Alaska. She said she is
advocating on behalf of her five grandchildren. She shared that
she was happy to raise her children in a safe community;
however, an increase in mass shootings means her grandchildren
are not safe. She stated that many mass shooters exhibit red
flag behavior leading up to their deadly crimes. SB 229 would
give law enforcement and family members a tool to address these
red flags before it is too late. She added that SB 229 would
protect due process rights while providing a legal means to
deescalate and deter tragedy. She pointed out that 21 states
have similar laws. She questioned why protecting Alaskans is not
the obvious choice. She offered reflections on the Sandy Hook
school shooting and shared a poem she wrote from the perspective
of a Sandy Hook first grader.
4:56:13 PM
MARIAN CLOUGH, representing self, Auke Bay, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 229. She said she has children and grandchildren
living in Alaska and emphasized the importance of finding ways
to save lives in light of the epidemic of gun violence in the
United States. She commented that Florida is a Republican-led
state that has adopted red flag laws. She indicated that SB 229
would be a positive step to addressing gun violence in Alaska.
4:58:27 PM
JAN CAULFIELD, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 229. She expressed disappointment that Senators
Wielechowski and Claman had to leave during the only hearing on
this important topic. She stated that SB 229 would give family
and law enforcement a due process tool to temporarily remove
firearms from a person in crisis who is showing signs of harming
themself or others. She noted that many organizations (including
the Office of Veterans Affairs and Suicide prevention
organizations) recognize the need to ensure that guns cannot be
readily accessed by someone experiencing a mental health crisis.
She said 21 states have adopted similar legislation, recognizing
that extreme risk laws can mitigate the risk of gun violence
toward oneself and others. She encouraged further discussion on
the broader topics of gun safety and gun harm in Alaska and an
openness to developing solutions that would save lives. She
shared several statistics on gun-related violence in Alaska. She
emphasized the importance of addressing these statistics and
acknowledged the concerns regarding gun rights. She stated that
this issue should not be ignored. She pointed out that there is
additional gun-related legislation being considered.
5:02:17 PM
LAURA FLEMING, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 229. She said that she is a former legislative
staffer. She is also a parent and grandparent. She urged members
to add Alaska to the long list of states that have enacted
extreme risk protective orders. She stated that Alaska is
currently second in the rate of suicide deaths and fourth for
gun related deaths. She asserted that Alaska does not want to be
first in either of these statistics. She stated that losing 7.5
percent of Alaskans to death by suicide does not sound like much
until you are directly impacted by this loss. She listed states
that have enacted GVPO laws and opined that Alaska does not want
to be last in enacting these lifesaving laws - and first in the
number of deaths by gun.
5:04:34 PM
PATRICK MARTIN, representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 229. He expressed concern with the assertion
that this is a way to help those suffering from mental health
crises. He stated that these claims are unqualified, as are
claims that SB 229 would help high suicide, domestic violence,
and sexual assault rates. He added that these claims are being
used to justify infringing on Alaskans' second amendment rights.
He asserted that there is no evidence of a mental health crisis
in the state. He stated that there is no proven connection
between lawful gun ownership and suicide, domestic violence, and
sexual assault. He added that there is no link between violating
Alaskan's second amendment rights and a reduction in suicide,
domestic violence, and sexual assault rates. He questioned the
data provided as supporting documentation for SB 229, including
a study referenced in the sponsor statement. He expressed doubt
of the stated intention behind this legislation and suggested
that the true intention is to infringe on Alaskans'
constitutional rights.
5:08:00 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI noted that the aforementioned study will be made
available online.
5:08:13 PM
At ease
5:08:25 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI reconvened the meeting. He clarified that the
study in question is the Princeton Study (1991-2016). He
reiterated that this would be made available to the public.
5:08:58 PM
RICK MCCLURE, President, Alaska Gun Rights, Anchorage, Alaska,
testified in opposition to SB 229. He asserted that SB 229 is a
violation of the second and fourth amendments of Constitution of
the United States and is also in violation of the Alaska state
constitution. He said that thousands of petitions were submitted
against the red flag law.
5:09:58 PM
KITRA CHASYAH, representing self, South Carolina, testified in
opposition to SB 229. She stated that she is planning on moving
to Alaska. She shared her story as a domestic violence and
mental abuse survivor. She opined that if someone is going to
commit a crime, GVPO will not stop them. She asserted that SB
229 would merely disarm law-abiding citizens. She shared that
she has trained to use a firearm for self-protection. She stated
that the best way to protect victims is to teach them to protect
themselves. She added that SB 229 is not a safe option for
herself or for others in similar situations.t
5:13:03 PM
At ease
5:13:51 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI reconvened the meeting.
5:15:58 PM
ODETTE EDGAR, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 229. She said that suicides leave a gaping hole
for family members that ripples through the community. She
shared her belief that this legislation is a reasonable way to
save lives.
5:16:41 PM
LUANN MCVEY, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 229. She said she is a retired schoolteacher from
Douglas, Alaska. She shared a brief history of her experience
working with children and their families. She stated that
children experience depression, anger, and frustration - which
can escalate into the taking of a life. She said that everyone
experiences strong negative emotions - and they may choose to
take up a firearm and act on these emotions. SB 229 would
provide a tool to avoid gun violence in situations where certain
behaviors cause concern. She pointed out that Alaska does not
currently have any way to protect against gun violence toward
self and/or others.
5:19:33 PM
CHAIR KAWASAKI offered apologies to those waiting online to
testify. He held public testimony on SB 229 open.
5:20:12 PM
SENATOR TOBIN thanked the committee for hearing SB 229. She
added that this legislation is reasonable and protects due
process. She reiterated that she grew up in rural Alaska, with
firearms in the home. She also has firearms in her home in
Anchorage. She emphasized that SB 229 is not about infringement
upon second amendment rights; rather, it is about protecting the
lives of Alaskans and empowering courts and law enforcement to
take preventive action. She said that at any given time, someone
is thinking about hurting themselves or someone else with a gun
- and this is an opportunity to discuss what can be done to
prevent this.
CHAIR KAWASAKI held SB 229 in committee.