HB 69 - EXEMPT FIREARMS FROM FEDERAL REGULATION  1:38:11 PM CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 69, "An Act exempting certain firearms and firearm accessories in this state from federal regulation; providing criminal penalties for federal officials who enforce or attempt to enforce a federal law, regulation, rule, or order regulating certain firearms and firearm accessories in this state; and providing for an effective date." [Left pending from the hearing on 2/8/13 was the motion to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 69, Version 28-LS0290\N, Strasbaugh, 2/4/13, as the working document; included in members' packets was a new proposed CS for HB 69, Version 28- LS0290\O, Strasbaugh.] 1:38:45 PM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN withdrew his motion to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 69, Version 28-LS0290\N, Strasbaugh, 2/4/13, as the working document. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN then moved to adopt the proposed CS for HB 69, Version 28-LS0290\O, Strasbaugh, as the working document. There being no objection, Version O was before the committee. 1:39:09 PM REPRESENTATIVE MIKE CHENAULT, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, relayed that Version O of HB 69 incorporates changes addressing concerns raised about taxation and retroactivity. 1:39:47 PM THOMAS WRIGHT, Staff, Representative Mike Chenault, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of the sponsor of HB 69, Representative Chenault, explained that to ensure continuation of certain federal funding, the language in Section 1's paragraph (1) referencing the taxation of firearms and ammunition has been removed; and that to address an ex post facto problem, the language stipulating that Section 5's proposed new AS 44.99.500(f) is retroactive to January 1, 2013, has been removed. 1:43:14 PM LYNN WILLIS said he opposes HB 69 and its concept because it would make felons out of law-abiding Alaskans employed by the federal government, including Alaska's congressional delegation. How would legislators feel if a municipality passed an ordinance stipulating that State laws are unenforceable within the municipality and that those who create/enforce such laws are criminals? With regard to the bill's attempt to nullify federal law, he asked members to consider that over 600,000 Americans died between 1861 and 1865 when certain southern states attempted it. Furthermore, multiple federal court rulings don't uphold the concept. The federal government, he predicted, isn't going to just stand by and allow nullification or allow the punishment of federal employees for enforcing federal law. MR. WILLIS added: I served 22 years as a member of the Alaska National Guard; as a federal civil servant and as an active duty member, I served with federal marshals, federal civil service employees, as well as state troopers and Anchorage police officers - we were all guardsman. What would you have us do under the concept of this bill? Arrest each other? MR. WILLIS, in conclusion, mentioned that he's submitted written testimony in opposition to HB 69, and surmised that passage of HB 69 would illustrate to all Alaskans employed by the federal government just how they can expect to be treated by the legislature. CHAIR KELLER, after ascertaining that no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 69. He indicated favor with HB 69. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG warned that federal employees will enforce federal law, and therefore any Alaskans who rely on HB 69 to protect them from such enforcement shall nonetheless end up in federal court and perhaps be convicted of a federal crime. This is something he is loath to subject his constituents to, he relayed, and therefore, for this reason as well as because the bill is both unconstitutional and unenforceable, he would be voting against the bill regardless that he disapproves of the federal government's actions. Some other approach should be taken, he opined, such as striving to have federal law changed. 1:52:22 PM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN moved to report the proposed CS for HB 69, Version 28-LS0290\O, Strasbaugh, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 69(JUD) was reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.