HB 408 - MISCONDUCT INVOLVING WEAPONS  2:26:16 PM CHAIR RAMRAS announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 408, "An Act relating to misconduct involving weapons." 2:27:08 PM BEN MULIGAN, Staff, Representative Bill Stoltze, Alaska State Legislature, explained that HB 408 is before the committee as the result of the court case Caron vs. U.S. that is now being interpreted by the federal government as restricting firearm possession. This legislation proposes to change the affirmative offense in AS 11.61.200(b) to a non-applicability provision. He further explained that under the Caron case the interpretation is that if there is any restriction for carrying or possessing firearms, that right is no longer retained under the federal government. 2:29:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, Alaska State Legislature, interjected that HB 408 attempts to develop a logical path for those who have lost their right to own a gun to reestablish their right to bear arms. He noted the similarity of this effort to that of reestablishing voting rights. In discussing this with legislators from rural areas of Alaska, there are circumstances in which the inability to own a firearm affects the essence of the way of life in some areas. CHAIR RAMRAS related that he doesn't see language in HB 408 that creates two classes of rights, one for those who have lost the right to possess firearms due to a felony conviction and those who have a felony conviction that involved weapons. He asked if it's possible to address that in the legislation. REPRESENTATIVE STOLTZE characterized HB 408 as a starting point and the language to which Chair Ramras referred could certainly be part of the discussion. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG expressed interest in any citations for relevant cases other than the Caron v. U.S. and Gabrielle v. State of Alaska cases. 2:36:03 PM JIM ADAMS related his personal experience in which he was convicted in 1985 and the judge waived the anti-gun [possession provision] but was given five years of probation. He, then, applied for and received a federal firearms license in 1986. After attending gun smith schools outside of Alaska in 1986 and 1989, he was informed by the state in 1998 that he would have to turn over his federal firearms license due to changes in the law. He was told that under the State of Alaska law he couldn't own handguns. He was also told by the federal government that he could either own any type of firearm or no firearm. At this point, Mr. Adams said that he isn't allowed to purchase a handgun, rifle, or shotgun in his own name. He informed the committee that he never had any difficulties with the law prior or after the 1985 conviction. Therefore, he would like to be able to enjoy the use of firearms again, including gunsmithing. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG characterized Mr. Adams' case as very compelling. 2:41:42 PM ERIC STANLEY related his support for HB 408. Mr. Stanley characterized himself as an "average Joe" who has paid his debt to society, received a pardon under suspended imposition of sentence (SIS). He noted that he has also fulfilled all the obligations, terms, and conditions of his probation after being charged with theft in the second degree due to receiving stolen property when he was 19 or 20 years of age. Mr. Stanley, an outdoorsman, said that he sometimes asks himself whether he should have the right to protect his own life. He related that due to his inability to carry a gun he has stopped taking his daughter fishing [and other things such as biking and camping] as he refuses to place his daughter in a situation in which he can't protect her. "I have no desire to break the law and carry a gun unlawfully, so what choices or rights do I have? I feel as if my right to spend quality time with my family has somewhat been encroached on also," he opined. Mr. Stanley expressed his hope that someday his rights and the rights of others in similar situations will be restored. Although fishing is a major part of his life and he isn't willing to give it up, he fears that it is only a matter of time before he finds himself in an encounter with a bear during which he won't be unable to defend himself. CHAIR RAMRAS remarked that Mr. Stanley illustrates his earlier point regarding the difference between individuals who have committed a felony with a weapon versus those who've committed a felony without a weapon. He inquired as to the details of Mr. Stanley's case. MR. STANLEY related that in his case, the theft in the second degree was due to receipt of a stolen weapon. At the time, he said he didn't know the weapon was stolen. He clarified that he didn't use a weapon in the commission of a crime. 2:48:53 PM RICHARD PATTERSON relayed that he has been a pilot in the Bush for the last 30 years, the last 15 years he has been engaged in medivac and search and rescue operations encompassing the North Slope and the Northwest Arctic Borough. He related that a firearm is a tool that he must have in his profession and thanked the legislature for addressing this issue for those with felony convictions. He told the committee that years ago he erred, saw it was wrong, and corrected the situation. Mr. Patterson said that his success is the result of hard work, dedication, loyalty to Alaskans, and those he serves. He further said that he has made exemplary rehabilitative efforts and performed extraordinary acts that have been recognized by a duly elected executive officer of Alaska. Mr. Patterson was granted a full, unconditional pardon in order to allow him to have handguns to protect others. He recounted various bear encounters he has experienced and opined that a firearm is not a luxury but is instead a necessity. Mr. Patterson then related his support for HB 408, but suggested that it be amended such that all rights to bear firearms are restored. He pointed out that the federal government is intervening in the legislature and the power to pardon lies in the executive branch and legislative instruments that interfere with that pardon clearly violate the separation of powers. In conclusion, Mr. Patterson expressed hope that the inadequacies in HB 408 will be rectified. 2:53:32 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that HB 408 goes beyond the restorative right to bear arms but also affects his constituents. He related his intention to pursue the issue of ensuring that the civil rights of rehabilitated individuals are fully restored. CHAIR RAMRAS concurred. 2:54:32 PM DON CLARK related the situation in which he found himself convicted of a controlled substance violation. He was told that if he pleads guilty he would face a fine, two years probation, SIS, and that upon completion of the conditions his record would be wiped clean and all his rights returned. The aforementioned happened, except that he was unable to purchase a weapon because federal law and state law have been interpreted differently. Mr. Clark noted that he utilized every avenue available, but nothing was enough for the federal government. Therefore, he approached Mr. Ross for help, which led to [HB 408]. He opined that in Alaska hunting and fishing are a way of life and a firearm is a necessity not a luxury. In closing, Mr. Clark stated that the law needs to be changed. 2:56:44 PM WAYNE ANTHONY ROSS, Attorney at Law, reviewed Alaska's law with regard to the rights of convicted felons to own firearms. However, under the Caron case if there are any restrictions on an individual's right to own a firearm, then that individual can't possess any type of firearm. The aforementioned, in essence, changes the state's law. Although Mr. Ross remarked that HB 408 might need to be fine tuned, it stands up for state's rights and provides Alaskans with the rights the state's imposed [prior to the Caron case.] MR. ROSS, in response to Chair Ramras, indicated his agreement with differentiating between those who used a weapon to commit a felony and those who did not. He opined that previously passed legislation already made such a distinction. 3:01:01 PM BRIAN JUDY, Alaska Liaison, National Rifle Association (NRA), opined that although this is a complicated issue, there's a simple solution. He then pointed out that members' packets should contain detailed technical background information regarding how the state is in this situation. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he supports the bill, and would like to hear Mr. Judy's concerns so the committee can address them. MR. JUDY explained that under the Caron decision unless a state restores 100 percent of an individual's rights and treats him/her as any other law-abiding individual who never lost rights, the individual has no rights for the purposes of the federal law. Alaska essentially restores 95 percent of the individual's rights [with regard to weapons]. With regard to the distinction in classes [of felons], Mr. Judy pointed out that it's already distinguished in law. There's a prohibition for carrying firearms that are capable of being concealed and there's a separate prohibition for concealed carry of a handgun. Both of those prohibitions can be found in AS 11.61.200 and for both there are affirmative defenses. The affirmative defense for carrying a concealed handgun is restoration of rights and a limitation on carry. Mr. Judy suggested that HB 408 be amended by repealing the limitations on concealed carry, as specified in AS 11.61.200(g)(2). He further suggested that the affirmative defenses need to be changed, as specified in AS 11.61.200(b) and (g), to exceptions. The aforementioned changes will, in effect, completely restore the rights of deserving individuals. If an individual who has had his/her rights restored can be arrested and charged with a crime and then raise an affirmative defense, that individual isn't treated the same as an individual who has never lost his/her rights and can't be charged with that crime in the first place. With regard to the specific classes, Mr. Judy reiterated that in statute there is already a distinction between felons who have their rights restored and the felony wasn't against a person and felons who did have a crime against another person. Furthermore, those individuals who violated AS 11.41, who committed a crime against another individual, can't get their rights restored. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG requested that Mr. Judy mark up HB 408 and provide it to Mr. Mulligan, who would forward it to the committee. [HB 408 was held over.]