Legislature(1995 - 1996)
01/23/1996 03:32 PM Senate STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 338 & SB 177 CONCEALED HANDGUN PERMIT AMENDMENTS
Number 001
CHAIR JAMES called the joint meeting of the House & Senate State
Affairs Committees to order at 3:32 p.m. and brought up HB 338 and
SB 177 as the only order of business before the committees. The
chair noted there were committee substitutes for HB 338 and SB 177.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to adopt the committee
substitute for HB 338.
CHAIR JAMES, hearing no objection, stated the committee substitute
for HB 338 was adopted.
SENATOR LEMAN made a motion to adopt the committee substitute for
SB 177.
CHAIR JAMES, hearing no objection, stated the committee substitute
for SB 177 was adopted.
CHAIR JAMES called Senator Green to testify.
Number 050
SENATOR LYDA GREEN, prime sponsor of SB 177, stated the intent of
SB 177 is to simplify the permitting process and reduce costs in
order to make the permits more readily available.
Number 070
SENATOR GREEN read her sponsor statement for SB 177.
Number 110
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asked if the committee substitutes would
allow a permittee to carry a concealed weapon into banks, schools,
state or federal offices, court houses, and passenger loading and
unloading areas in airline terminals. That possibility concerns
him.
Number 120
SENATOR GREEN responded that federal law already prohibits carrying
concealed weapons in airports and all federal facilities.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS said it bothers him that carrying concealed
weapons isn't prohibited on school grounds.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said that bothered him also.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS is concerned with where a concealed weapon
would be allowed. He is also concerned that an applicant would not
have to place a life-sized silhouette in a target: apparently it's
not necessary to be a good shot to obtain a permit; that the
Department of Public Safety (DPS) will no longer be conducting spot
checks with the FBI; that permit holders do not have to demonstrate
proficiency in the use of the weapon they carry; reciprocity
between states, and that permits would not be suspended for
misdemeanor offenses.
SENATOR GREEN asked Senator Phillips to repeat his first concern.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS repeated he was concerned about allowing
concealed carrying on school grounds. A new subsection would allow
permittees to carry into preschools, elementary, junior high, and
secondary schools without permission from school officials. Of all
the provisions, that one concerns him most.
Number 168
SENATOR DONLEY questioned whether that provision would override
other prohibitions in Alaska Statute regarding guns on school
grounds. He asked Senator Green to address that question also.
Number 175
SENATOR GREEN stated that the precept that should be above all
others is that the right of permittees should be upheld to the
limit of the constitution. There are some glaring provisions that
the sponsors are willing to talk about. This legislation is the
starting point.
Number 200
CHAIR JAMES reminded legislators that the legislation will not be
passed out until a few more changes are made. Prohibitions on
where permittees can carry is one of the biggest problems of
permittees. If it is a right for a person to carry a concealed
handgun, once they've gone through the process of becoming
permitted, then they ought to be able to carry a weapon wherever it
is they want to carry it, as long as it's not prohibited by federal
law. Concealed carry is the issue, and if you're going to carry a
concealed weapon, you'd better keep it concealed. No one needs to
know and know one ought to know that you have it, because then the
whole benefit of having it concealed is gone. The process today is
to find what needs to be changed. This committee substitute will
not be passed out today.
Number 235
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER noted that Section 2 allows permittees to
carry concealed weapons into a bar. He asked if businesses could
continue to ban carrying concealed weapons on their premises by
posting a notice to that effect.
SENATOR GREEN replied that ability is removed by HB 338 and SB 177.
Number 262
CHAIR JAMES does not think individual businesses should be allowed
to prohibit concealed carrying on their premises; she thinks the
places one most needs a concealed weapon is in parking lots, and
that would force a permittee to leave their weapon in their car.
Number 275
SENATOR DONLEY asked for an affirmative defense for Section 2.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER noted that item 61.223 is the prohibition
against carrying a weapon in a bar.
SENATOR DONLEY noted that would be an affirmative defense for that
part. He asked if anything addresses prohibitions on having guns
on school grounds.
Number 285
BRETT HUBER, Aide to Senator Lyda Green, stated Section 1 of the
bill would offer an affirmative defense for carrying a concealed
handgun onto school grounds, just as Section 2 does for liquor
dispensers.
Number 290
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN stated he shares Senator Phillips concerns.
He is concerned that we might share reciprocity with other states
that do not share as rigorous a review as Alaska. He also asked if
there have been a rash of problems in parking lots.
CHAIR JAMES responded she does not know if there is a rash, but
there have been incidents.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN thinks if there are problems in certain areas
of a town, why not just stay out of those areas. He doesn't know
why a weapon has to be concealed. He is concerned that provisions
in the law that convinced legislators to vote for the legislation
two years ago are now being removed. Representative Green thinks
HB 338 and SB 177 are a giant step towards vigilantism.
Number 320
CHAIR JAMES noted that reciprocity between Alaska's law and other
states would be determined by DPS, and they would only allow it for
residents of states with restrictions similar to Alaska's. The
chair asks people to please understand that the legislation is not
a finished draft, and she is anxious to hear everyone's concerns.
She asked that legislators not throw it all out just because they
don't like specifics; it is changeable.
Number 329
SENATOR LEMAN asked how many applicants had been rejected on the
basis of an FBI background check.
SENATOR GREEN replied she does not have that information, though
the representative from DPS, who will be testifying, may have that
information.
Number 340
SENATOR LEMAN stated he was concerned about not having FBI checks.
MR. HUBER answered that the elimination is only the instant name
check. Fingerprint requirements will still be a part of the
application process. There have been problems with the name check
due to some people having the same name.
Number 360
ART SNOWDEN, Administrative Director, Alaska Court System, stated
the court system is only concerned with Section 12 of the
legislation. That section would allow concealed weapons in state
courthouses. The judiciary contends that it is not proper to have
weapons, even by people who know how to handle them, in our
courthouses, because people fight in courthouses. Emotions take
over. We believe very strongly that no weapons should be allowed
in courthouses in this state, and we would like to put that in the
record.
CHAIR JAMES asked if there is screening at courthouses.
MR. SNOWDEN responded that there is only screening in Anchorage and
Fairbanks. The state does not have the capability to fund
screening in all state courthouses. Where we have screened, we
have found people coming in with concealed weapons. However,
coming to a courthouse isn't generally part of the daily routine
for most people.
Number 383
CHAIR JAMES asked if judges with concealed carry permits are
allowed to bring their weapon into a courthouse.
MR. SNOWDEN replied that court rules forbid judges from having guns
in courthouses.
Number 390
DEL SMITH, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Public Safety, thinks
the department has made great progress in trying to stream line the
process. The department prefers that the legislation stay the way
it is, however, the legislature is the policy maker in the state.
CHAIR JAMES asked Mr. Smith if he is able to provide the list of
misdemeanants.
MR. SMITH responded he has contacted the Anchorage Police
Department and the Presidents of the Chiefs Association, but they
have not gotten back to him with that information.
SENATOR SHARP asked Mr. Smith if he knows how many applications
have been refused as the result of an FBI check.
MR. SMITH replied that as of October, 1995 the number was 19. As
of last Wednesday, DPS had issued about 4,019 permits. Four
permits have been rescinded due to arrest of the permittee.
SENATOR SHARP asked if an officer calls in an I.D., is there a flag
in the computer system that lets him know that person has a
concealed weapons permit?
MR. SMITH responded yes.
Number 422
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated he was "passing around a list of
misdemeanors that are now precluded... if a person has a conviction
for one of these misdemeanors they're precluded to be issued a
permit."
Number 425
SENATOR DONLEY stated that one standard for applying misdemeanors
is whether it is a crime against a person. He asked if anyone
remembers why that standard was not used as a basis and then add on
to that.
Number 432
CHAIR JAMES thinks they were trying to include crimes with any kind
of violence to them.
Number 437
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIS asked if lowering the application fees would
impact the department.
MR. SMITH replied the current fee is $122. $24 goes to the FBI
when fingerprints are submitted for checking; $35 is used for the
in-state fingerprint check and criminal history review. The
remaining $63 was to provide for permits and licensing. The actual
cost has turned out to be somewhat less than $63, and DPS could
move down somewhat from that. But he is concerned that if you cut
the fee, more people will apply, and they will then need more money
to process applications. Cutting the fee from a total of $122 to
$65 would have a substantial impact on the department and it's
ability to provide timely service. It is fee driven.
CHAIR JAMES noted she will be investigating that issue further.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked Mr. Smith to explain procedurally the
FBI name check, as opposed to the fingerprint check.
MR. SMITH responded he originally believed the department could not
do a national name check for purposes of a concealed weapon permit.
But the FBI informed us that was not true. With a name check, the
FBI could tell us if a person had a conviction that precluded them
from carrying a concealed weapon. The FBI would say "no", but they
would not tell us what that conviction was. They will not release
specific information without a fingerprint.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER asked Mr. Smith if he reads the legislation
as still requiring FBI fingerprint checks.
MR. SMITH responds he does read the legislation as still requiring
that. However he is concerned that the sponsor's statement says
the legislation would delete FBI investigation, but he doesn't
think that's what the statement meant.
Number 485
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN does not want to see the state subsidizing the
cost of permitting. He also thinks the state should continue to
require proficiency of use. He related an incident he thinks
supports the need for requiring proficiency.
Number 503
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN noted the legislation deletes the requirement
to qualify for specific action types and calibers. He asked if the
legislation could just specify qualifying for action types, and
then permittees could just choose whatever caliber they want, as
long as they can hang on to it. He suggested that might be a
reasonable alternative. He doesn't think the size of the caliber
would make much difference, as long as they know how to handle the
weapon.
Number 510
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER agreed with Representative Ogan's position on
the action type. The reason for requiring proficiency in action
types is so someone who only had training with a revolver wouldn't
carry an automatic and not even be able to get the clip in and out,
which happens. It happens to police officers.
CHAIR JAMES told Representative Porter not to admit that.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER stated that the caliber restriction was to
keep people from carrying a 44, when they had only qualified on a
22. The difference is night and day.
Number 521
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN added that during the training in which he
participated, most people didn't know the difference between a
double action or single action, did have difficulty with one
weapon, and perhaps not the other one, and there was a significant
difference in ability to handle higher caliber weapons. He agreed
with Representative Porter that being qualified on one weapon
shouldn't automatically qualify a person on another weapon. But he
thinks if you qualify on a 45, you should be qualified for lower
calibers.
Number 532
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asked Mr. Smith how many inquiries regarding
permits have been made.
MR. SMITH responded he does not have that information.
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asked if there have been complaints
regarding the permitting process.
MR. SMITH responded he hopes concerns have been addressed. There
were a few complaints, mostly over the initial speed of processing
applications. He personally has not ever received a complaint from
anyone about the application fee.
Number 542
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asked if there have been any complaints
about the law.
MR. SMITH replied none that he is aware of.
Number 545
JOHN NEALON, Sergeant, Valdez Police Department, NRA Member,
testifying from Valdez, stated he does not oppose laws allowing
concealed carrying of handguns with provisions for training
requirements. He thinks the training requirements in the original
bill were wholly inadequate. He sees those original requirements
reemerging in the legislation before the committee. He also thinks
it is important that citizens know the legal parameters for using
deadly force. In his contact with the public, he has found that
most people, including gun owners, know very little about criminal
or civil law related to the use of deadly force. Hunter safety
does not prepare people to carry concealed weapons. He also
believes there is very little military training related to
concealed weapons in civilian self defense, with the possible
exception of military police.
MR. NEALON does not agree that the application fee and the training
requirements have kept some people from applying. He thinks the
number of people estimated to have wanted permits was overstated by
supporters of the original legislation. If there are people who
cannot obtain a permit because of the expense, he would rather see
the application fee waived for those who can prove financial
hardship. He supports requiring training so that citizens of our
state can be assured that only qualified men and women will obtain
permits. The concealed handgun law is a good one; it works.
Repealing the training and proficiency requirements is a bad idea.
Number 579
SENATOR LEMAN asked Mr. Nealon to clarify whether it was the
training requirements in the original bill before it was marked up
that were inadequate, and not the bill that was passed. He asked
if Mr. Nealon was satisfied with the training requirements
currently in statute.
MR. NEALON replied that is correct: he thought the training
requirements in the original legislation were inadequate, but that
the version that passed the legislature was adequate. The training
requirements in statute are adequate. They could be improved, but
they are adequate.
GARY JUDD, President, Nuvuk Gun Club, testifying from Barrow,...
TAPE 96-1, SIDE B
...stated he supports HB 338 and SB 177, with the exception of
Section 7, which was eloquently explored by Mr. Nealon. However,
he expressed concern that there is no immunity from civil liability
for citizens who, during a criminal attack, inflict damage, loss,
or death on a criminal. This does not affect the criminal judicial
process, which is charged with ascertaining the circumstances,
justifications, and truth of an incident, but rather a mechanism to
stop criminals in civil court from victimizing a law-abiding
citizen for the second time. He thinks this legislation would be
a good place to address this issue.
Number 570
SENATOR GREEN voiced concern that people are not testifying to the
current committee substitute.
CHAIR JAMES stated that regardless of what people are saying, the
testimony is valid. She thinks their concerns are valid anyway.
SENATOR GREEN thinks their concerns have already been addressed.
CHAIR JAMES stated that does not make any difference.
Number 562
ELZIE ISLEY, testifying from Ketchikan, stated that local-option
elections should be ruled out, because how are permittees supposed
to know that some area has had an election. He also commented that
the prices are about right. Mr. Isley asked why won't the law-
enforcement bodies fingerprint anyone for a concealed weapon permit
or a federal firearms license. He had a hard time getting his
fingerprints for the concealed carry permit. He also thinks that
to delete the requirements to qualify with the specific action or
caliber of a handgun probably should be in there. He can't see any
reason to give a permit to someone who doesn't know how to handle
a handgun.
Number 540
ROBERT NESVICK, JR., Retired Alaska State Trooper, Former Police
Chief of Annette Islands Reserve, concealed carry permit holder,
testifying from Ketchikan, stated the requirements to qualify with
specific actions and calibers should remain. He does think the
restrictions on where permittees can carry does need to be
modified. All those restrictions aren't necessary considering all
the training permittees receive. He is also concerned that there
is no language addressing retired law-enforcement officers.
Number 524
NEIL CAMERON, testifying from Anchorage, stated the whole reason a
permitting process is in place today is because of the overwhelming
participation of Alaskan residents. He asked if he can contact the
legislators offices in order to be updated with the revisions and
give comment.
CHAIR JAMES said that would be fine; Mr. Cameron could be put on
the mailing list.
Number 510
GARY CARLSON, testifying from Anchorage, stated his support for HB
338 and SB 177. He thinks the concealed carry law was enacted in
response to passage of the Brady bill. He thinks there is a
widespread movement towards a new world order and a one-world
government: gun control and disarmament is an essential part of
this program. We are seeing that today in people being bought off.
Mr. Carlson asserted that the politicians of this century have been
able to accomplish a more effective disarmament than George III and
all his minions. The american people have the right to bear arms.
Number 480
ED KNOEBEL, testifying from Glennallen, asked if permittees will
have to re-submit all the application paperwork for renewals of
permits. He thinks military training should be sufficient to
satisfy training requirements.
Number 465
DOUGLAS RHODES, testifying from Glennallen, stated he agrees with
most of the revisions. He is particularly concerned with where a
permittee can carry concealed. He thinks permittees should be able
to carry into banks and bars. Mr. Rhodes stated he cannot even
carry a concealed weapon legally in his house. He also does not
think that permittees should have to repeat all the training to
renew a permit and that the price for permits should be lowered.
In regards to the training requirements, Mr. Rhodes thinks if a
person can handle a 38 auto, that person should have no problem
with a 44 auto. He doesn't thinks most people would carry more
than they're comfortable with.
Number 442
PATRICK DALTON, testifying from Delta Junction, cited Article 1,
Section 19 in the Alaska State Constitution and asserted that state
legislators and law enforcement can't even read their own
constitution. Mr. Dalton thinks requiring someone to have a permit
takes away their right to bear arms.
Number 430
BERNARD GOODNO, testifying from Delta Junction, reminded the
committee that in 1994 the people of Alaska voted to amend the
state constitution to add, "The individual right to keep and bear
arms shall not be denied or infringed by the state or political
subdivisions of the state." Mr. Goodno asserted that means he has
the right to carry any way he so chooses.
Number 415
LYMAN NICHOLS, testifying from Kenai, stated most of his testimony
has been taken care of by the amendments in the committee
substitute to the legislation. Mr. Nichols informed the committee
that it is difficult to meet the training requirements in the small
village from which he comes. Therefor, he would like to see
provision made the smaller villages for training. Perhaps a video
could be used. In addition, Mr. Nichols thinks retired peace
officers should be entitled to obtain a permit directly. Mr.
Nichols stated he really supports the other changes, particularly
Section 12, which allows permittees to carry in more places.
Number 393
CLARK BURGER, testifying from Kenai, stated that to change where a
permittee is not allowed to carry a concealed weapon to only where
disallowed by federal law would make a heck of a difference to a
bunch of us. Just think of how many guns of people in this
teleconference are out in our cars and trucks: they're gonna be
awful cold when you put 'em back in!
Number 380
PATRICK JOHNSON, Firearms instructor, NRA member, Permit holder,
testifying from Homer, is opposed to deleting training requirements
and deleting the five-year renewal requirement. Mr. Johnson
supports lowering application fees and amending where permittees
are allowed to carry.
Number 345
LAURA JANE WINEINGER, NRA, testifying from Matsu, stated the
primary concern she has heard is the application cost for permits.
The NRA agrees the fee should be lowered, and that restrictions on
where a permittee can carry should be removed. Ms. Wineinger
believes training requirements should be at a minimum. Training
should be the responsibility of the permit applicant. The NRA
wants an amendment allowing derringers and miniature handguns,
which were designed for concealment and self protection.
Number 290
SENATOR LEMAN asked Ms. Wineinger what she thinks of the one-year
residency requirement for current applicants.
MS. WINEINGER responded the residency requirements should be gotten
rid of.
Number 275
CHARLES STIEHR, testifying from Matsu, stated it's a constitutional
right to carry. There is also a responsibility to protect our
family. If there has to be a permit system at all, the only thing
that should encompass should be proficiency. Fees should just be
in an amount to cover expenses.
Number 264
DAVID WILLIAMS, testifying from Fairbanks, encouraged the committee
to support the committee substitute for HB 338. He thinks
permittees are irrationally treated as dangerous citizens. The
possession of firearms does not make law-abiding citizens a danger
to society. He asked that trust please be put in the people.
Number 234
BONNIE WILLIAMS, permittee, testifying from Fairbanks, informed the
committee that she appreciated receiving copies of regulations and
statute pertaining to concealed carry. She suggested that DPS
consider mailing changes in statute and regulation to permit-
holders. She also approves deleting training requirements in
specific action and caliber, reducing permit application fees, and
deletion of where permittees can carry. She is concerned that
reciprocity would be cumbersome. She thinks it would be ridiculous
to put the mini-gun back in and not the derringer. She thinks
training on renewal should be deleted. She urged support for HB
338 and SB 177.
Number 200
THOMAS DEVINE, testifying from Matsu, thought the testimony from
people in Delta Junction was eloquent. Mr. Devine stated it was
every citizens responsibility and right to teach their children
about the solid foundation in the Constitution of the United States
and the Second Amendment.
Number 190
LLOYD BARRUS, testifying from Matsu, stated he had a permit one
time for which he paid five bucks. He said honest people get a
permit, and murderers don't. Mr. Barrus thinks some people need to
be careful who they marry. He trusts cops with guns, and so thinks
it's a slap in the face that they don't trust us (permittees?).
Only a fool would carry a gun they couldn't shoot, so he doesn't
know why they would talk about that.
Number 150
MARSHALL MARTIN, NRA member, weapons instructor & permit-holder,
testifying from Kenai, stated he supports nearly all of the
legislation. He has concern regarding where carrying is allowed.
Mr. Martin commented that Officer Nealon from Valdez stated Mr.
Martin's case very well. He really thinks the proficiency
provision needs to be retained. However, he doesn't see any need
for a residency requirement, and he would like to see reciprocal
agreements with other states. Mr. Martin wants to see fingerprint
requirements kept in law. He supports allowing peace officers'
retirement and off-duty carrying. He would like to see immunity
from civil liability from the criminal element.
Number 115
PHIL NASH, NRA member, testifying from Kenai, stated that the law
should address the issues of simplicity, credibility, and safety.
He agrees with Officer Nealon that there should be a provision to
opt in recently retired peace officers. But for the same reason he
agrees that there ought to be a renewal, he thinks that peace
officers who have been retired for a significant period of time
probably ought to go through the program. Mr. Nash also thinks the
proficiency distinction relative to action should be kept. User
fees should be consistent with costs. Since it's already a crime
to possess near schools, He doesn't think it would matter whether
that provision was dropped from the legislation.
Number 067
TIM SCHRAGET, permit-holder, testifying from Anchorage, thinks the
fingerprinting is an important part of the program, because it puts
the liability of proving existence of a criminal record on the
government. He also thinks it's important to keep training
requirements relative to the action of the weapon. He doesn't
think the residency requirement is important. Mr. Schraget stated
he is a small business owner in Anchorage, and he feels that the
government should be run as a small business: if it costs the
government $122 to process an application, then the fees should
reflect that. The renewal fee should reflect the cost to the
government also. In regards to where permittees can carry, Mr.
Schraget thinks permittees should be allowed to carry anywhere in
the state of Alaska.
TAPE 96-3, SIDE A
Number 001
JOAN FISHER, Mary Conrad Center, testifying from Anchorage,
informed the committee that she faxed written testimony to the
committee. She asked that the committee consider adding a
subsection adding health-care facilities to the list of places
where permittee can not carry a concealed handgun.
Number 018
SENATOR LEMAN asked Ms. Fisher if it would be sufficient to her for
the bill to simply be permissive in allowing individual health-care
facilities to ban carrying on their premises.
MS. FISHER responded that would be sufficient. She is concerned
that there is no strength in the law that would back up the center
in calling the police.
Number 043
SENATOR RANDY PHILLIPS asked Ms. Fisher if the Mary Conrad Center
has had experiences with people wanting to have concealed weapons
at health-care facilities.
MS. FISHER replied the center does have employees that would like
to carry weapons at work. We've dealt with that issue as a
personnel issue. We had an incident a few years ago where a
resident of an assisted-living facility shot an attendant. There
have also been suicides, but she is not sure that would have
anything to do with concealed weapons.
Number 062
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN asked Ms. Fisher if employees could store
concealed weapons in their lockers if they wanted to be able to
carry to and from work.
MS. FISHER responded that the Mary Conrad Center does allow
employees to lock up handguns in their lockers.
Number 090
LAUREE HUGONIN, Executive Director, Alaska Network on Domestic
Violence & Sexual Assault, stated her organization is particularly
concerned with 4th degree assault, which is on the list of
misdemeanors being considered for removal from the law. Most
domestic violence in Alaska gets classified as 4th degree assault.
Also on the list are stalking in the 2nd degree, misconduct
involving weapons in the 2nd and 3rd degree, criminal trespass in
the 1st and 2nd degree, and criminal mischief in the 3rd degree.
We would have serious concerns if these were deleted from current
statute. The network supports the additions requiring that the
laws and regulations concerning concealed weapons be given to each
applicant.
Number 120
MS. HUGONIN stated that the three main objections her organization
has with the legislation are:
1) being able to carry in to facilities serving victims of
domestic violence & sexual assault;
2) the removal of demonstration of competency in the weapons
they choose to carry;
3) removal of convictions of 2 class A misdemeanors of this
state or similar laws of another state.
Number 155
MICHAEL CULBERT, testifying from Fairbanks, urged that concealed
carry be kept in the simplest form possible and to do away with a
lot of restrictions.
Number 163
DOUGLAS SOMERS, testifying from Fairbanks, thinks even if all the
amendments to the concealed carry law in this legislation are
passed, Alaska would still have the most restrictive handgun law in
the United States. Mr. Somers also thinks that the more permit
applications that are processed, the lower the cost should be for
processing each permit. He stated that people should be proficient
in the weapon they choose to carry, but that is a matter of
personal accountability and it should not be up to the government
to determine that. Derringers were designed specifically for
personal carry. As far as retraining, Mr. Somers thinks we need to
do away with that.
Number 190
DON ZIMMERMAN, testifying from Matsu, believes it is not the
government's right to regulate anything, as far as handguns. It is
his own decision whether or not he has a handgun; it is his right
under the constitution.
Number 205
ERIC BECKMAN, firearms instructor, testifying from Matsu, agreed
with deleting the FBI investigation. He does not think the federal
government should be involved: state's rights, state sovereignty.
But he does not agree that requirements to qualify on specific
actions should be deleted. He also does not think residency
requirements should be deleted, with the exception of reciprocity
agreements. Mr. Beckman thinks fees should be lowered and places
permittees can carry should be increased.
Number 245
ROD CHRISTOPHER, Peninsula Weapons Academy, testifying from Kenai,
stated, as far as qualification goes, people must be familiar with
their weapons. He thinks two important requirements for
reciprocity would be background checks and a law class on using
deadly force. Mr. Christopher thinks we should not have
reciprocity with states that do not have those requirements. He
thinks miniature handguns are dangerous, due to the fact they have
no factory trigger guard and they are subject to accidental
discharge. He would also like to see retired peace officers given
the opportunity to carry concealed without going through a course.
Mr. Christopher thinks they are as well trained or better trained
than any concealed-carry instructor.
Number 268
JESS BULKLEY, former police officer, testifying from Anchorage, is
concerned about constitutional rights to bear firearms. He thinks
people should be able to use their own judgement as to which
firearm they would like to carry. Even though there are exceptions
to the rule, why should we penalize all those who are competent by
forcing them to take training? He would like to see legislation
supporting the constitutional right to bear firearms.
Number 290
CHRIS SULLIVAN, testifying from Anchorage, does not agree that DPS
should be the entity to authorize reciprocity agreements. He would
like to see that authority moved to a higher level. He doesn't
want the governor or legislature to be able to change or delete any
reciprocity agreements. In addition, Mr. Sullivan disagrees with
the permitting process all together. He asserted that any
permitting process one has to go to is an infringement on the
constitutional right to keep and bear arms
Number 306
LADD MCBRIDE, testifying from Fairbanks, asked that the committee
not make exceptions to Section 12 of the legislation, regarding
where permittees can and cannot carry. Mr. McBride asked that the
renewal requirements be simplified as much as possible.
Number 325
JERRY POTTS, testifying from Fairbanks, stated his business
requires he and his family to work at night. This legislation
would restrict him having a handgun or any type of protection,
because it does not address whether the place is inhabited or not.
Mr. Potts also thinks the requirements for qualification on caliber
and action be deleted. The fee should only be enough to take care
of the fingerprinting and the background check.
Number 350
DAN HITCHCOCK, testifying from Fairbanks, stated he supports HB 338
and SB 177. He worries more about legislators who need training in
the constitution then about people carrying guns who are not
trained to use them.
Number 367
JAYNE ANDREEN, Executive Director, Council on Domestic Violence &
Sexual Assault, stated the council has two specific areas of
concern with the legislation: Section 10, which eliminates offenses
that would require the permit to be pulled out, and Section 12,
which would allow concealed carry in facilities that provide
services to victims of domestic violence & sexual assault. Ms.
Andreen stated that there has to be a safe place for victims of
domestic violence and sexual assault.
CHAIR JAMES asked Ms. Andreen if she has known any victims who
wished to protect themselves by having a concealed handgun.
MS. ANDREEN responded she is not aware of any. She is aware of
victims obtaining weapons or handguns, but is not aware that having
a concealed weapon would be an issue for them. But she has not
been in the direct service field since the concealed weapons
permits have been available.
CHAIR JAMES expressed concern that many of the people who would
most like to get permits, single women working odd hours, are
simply carrying concealed without getting a permit, due to the cost
of permits.
MS. ANDREEN noted that only a minority of women she's worked with
felt that having a weapon was a viable option for maintaining their
safety.
CHAIR JAMES related a personal incident in which having a gun gave
her peace of mind.
Number 447
SENATOR SHARP asked Ms. Andreen if she knows of any instances in
which the people involved in domestic violence had a concealed
carry permit.
MS. ANDREEN replied she is not aware of any.
Number 454
REPRESENTATIVE OGAN commented he believes Ms. Andreen could just
post a sign on the premises excluding concealed carrying.
CHAIR JAMES responded that would not be allowable with the
committee substitute.
Number 458
CHAIR JAMES adjourned the joint meeting of the House and Senate
State Affairs Committees at 5:37 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|