Current weather

  • Clear sky
  • 28°
    Clear sky
  • Comment

Bill to bar enforcement of new gun laws passes

Posted: February 25, 2013 - 11:12pm

JUNEAU — The Alaska House passed legislation Monday that would make it a felony for a federal official or agent to try to enforce new restrictions on gun ownership.

The 31-5 vote followed a lengthy floor debate. Supporters said the bill was an attempt to take a stand against federal encroachment on Second Amendment rights, but opponents said the measure flies in the face of the state and U.S. constitutions they took oaths to uphold.

The no votes all came from minority Democrats. Two members of that caucus, Reps. Geran Tarr and Chris Tuck of Anchorage, voted with the majority. Four representatives had excused absences Monday. Tuck had signed on as a co-sponsor of the measure and later served notice of reconsideration, meaning the bill could be voted on again. The measure must still be considered by the Senate.

Sharon Leighow, a spokeswoman for Gov. Sean Parnell, said in an email Monday the administration is still reviewing the bill, but Parnell strongly supports the Second Amendment “and Alaskans’ right to defend themselves. He remains concerned with the federal government continuing to restrict the rights and freedom of individuals.”

HB69 would deem unenforceable new federal laws, orders, rules or regulations that seek to ban or restrict ownership of a semi-automatic firearm or magazine, or that require a firearm, magazine or firearm accessory be registered.

A legislative attorney, Kathleen Strasbaugh, said in a January memo to the bill’s sponsor, Speaker Mike Chenault, R-Nikiski, that the bill is “largely unconstitutional.”

Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage, became emotional speaking in opposition to the bill, saying he was being asked to violate the oath that he and other lawmakers took earlier this year to uphold the constitution. He characterized HB69 as “secessionist talk.”

“We joined the team. Our star is on the flag,” Josephson said. “We didn’t have to do that. We demanded it, we implored our 48 sisters — Hawaii wasn’t admitted yet — to let us join this great team.”

Rep. Les Gara, D-Anchorage, noted it is illegal to interfere with a federal officer in the performance of his or her duties. He said there are better ways for lawmakers to express their dissatisfaction with what the federal government does, including by letter or resolution. “But it is not right to make our constituents think that illegal conduct is OK,” he said.

Proponents said they were sick of the federal government overreaching. Rep. Peggy Wilson, R-Wrangell, said the state has to take a stand somewhere along the way and say “enough is enough,” a sentiment echoed by many fellow majority Republicans. Rep. Dan Saddler, R-Eagle River, said if the measure has to go to court, that’s a price he is willing to pay.

Rep. Benjamin Nageak, D-Barrow, said he was conflicted about the vote but likened it to people who pushed back against the federal government and fought for the rights of Alaska Natives.

Rep. Charisse Millett, R-Anchorage, said she thought she had gotten more emails on the legal possession of firearms and gun rights than on oil taxes or any other issue in the state.

“I think we’d be sorely missing an opportunity if we didn’t pass this legislation. We’re pointing out that the states are equal. That we have rights. That we cannot be determined always by what is right for Washington, D.C., or the East Coast,” she said.

  • Comment

Comments (21)

Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
spwright
1376
Points
spwright 02/27/13 - 04:34 pm
0
2

2nd Amendment

I would be curious to see Who will attend this "2nd Amendment Rally" organized by Bob Bird of Nikiski.

Remember Mr Bird is the same person that organized the Rally at the Soldotna Sports Center & Mr Cox of the Alaska PeaceMakers Militia was the Guest Speaker along with Mister
Norm Olson of Nikiski.

Where is Mr Cox now ? a Convicted Felon Convict in Prison

Some Real Upstanding American Leadership to be chosen as the Guest Speaker there Mr. Bird. Hows that Working out for Ya ? Who's next ? Rush Limbaugh? Glenn Beck ?

SPW"Airborne"

Raoulduke
1824
Points
Raoulduke 02/27/13 - 06:56 pm
0
2

31

This state has got to have Thee 31 of the dumbest legislators anywhere.The passing of HB69 is at least going to bring charges of Obstruction of Justice.This is no victory for Alaska's states rights.The last time a state tried to usurp federal law.Governor Wallace of Alabama was trying to uphold that states right of segregation.Well! the military was used to enforce the federal law.Alaskan legislators to be so naive to think it can't happen here because this is Alaska.Are FOOLS,and Alaskans voted for them.Don't you feel stupid for doing so? FEDERAL law supersedes any state law period.So! HB69 will not be held up as constitutional.

jlmh
293
Points
jlmh 02/27/13 - 07:47 pm
1
0

"FEDERAL law supersedes any

"FEDERAL law supersedes any state law period." -Raoulduke

How do you figure? The tenth amendment specifically reserves legislative powers to the states except where explicitly granted to the federal government by the Constitution. The federal government does not have the authority to supercede state law whenever it wants. Does it have the manpower to? Perhaps. That's why citizens feel compelled to form militias.

Raoulduke
1824
Points
Raoulduke 02/28/13 - 05:59 am
0
1

supersedes

The state can not prevent.The federal government from performing their duty period.I stand by my statement. This HB69 will be found to be unconstitutional.Our Legislators took an oath,but to whom?These 31 legislators are on the verge of TREASON,and SEDITION for which.I hope. They are charged The federal government has already been delegated these powers.The federal government can,and has amended more than a few rights since 9/11.Recent example being the Patriot Act.Where your 1st,4th,5th,6th,7th,8th,9th,and 10th amendments have been circumvented,or denied to citizens.There wasn't much complaining about those moves.Maybe because a Republican administration ran the show.The show of one huge LIE.One must remember.We are still in a state of a DECLARED WAR,or has one forgotten.Just because We are not seeing our dead troops on the news at 6.Which is a great dishonor to those fallen troops.This censorship to the public means a weaker public opinion of the wars. Go figure.The last administration wanted to take your arms.Not just restrict types of weapons,or amount of magazine capacity.Reality is a lot different.Than the way one wishes.

BigRedDog
647
Points
BigRedDog 02/28/13 - 06:38 am
1
1

Treason, and impeachable Offense.

Obama is the one committing treason, his efforts to crush the 2nd Amendment are not defending the constitution as his oath of office demands. That you think you can play with this most treasured document like a your editing a blog is shameful. The same things Obama is saying about gun control have been said by Hitler and every totalitarian arms grabber in history. Every Blade of Grass!

Suss
2389
Points
Suss 02/28/13 - 09:37 am
1
0

2nd Amendment Freedom Rally

2nd Amendment Freedom Rally
Monday, March 4, 7:00 PM at KCHS auditorium
Featuring the following speakers, either in person or via remote SKYPE on a big screen:
· New York Times Best-Selling author Tom Woods … author of NULLIFICATION: How To Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century
· Anchorage attorney and former NRA Vice-President Wayne Anthony Ross
· Rep. Kendall Kroeker of Wyoming, sponsor of the Wyoming Firearm Protection Act
· Rep. Gabrielle LeDoux of Anchorage
· Seymour Mills – law historian
· Emcee: Bob Bird, local teacher and constitutional scholar
OUR FREEDOMS ARE HANGING BY A THREAD … WE CAN STILL DO SOMETHING!
Admission by Free Will Donation
Please be as generous as possible
QUESTIONS ANSWERED BY OPEN MIC
Coffee, pastry & bottled water donated by The Moose Is Loose and Kaladi Bros.
This event is sponsored by local citizens, not any official political or gun-rights organization

Norseman
2530
Points
Norseman 02/28/13 - 12:46 pm
1
1

Bob Bird is the same guy that

Bob Bird is the same guy that had Fairbanks milita Cox as the head speaker last time. Stated that he was a new and rising star for our state and country.
Now cox sits in prison while bird keeps teaching social studies.....

The rheteroic will be hot n heavy for sure. I saw in todays paper where bird called our president a dictator. I wonder what he is teaching our kids in class.
The school district needs to be sitting in on some of his classes to make sure he isn't inserting his nullification and seccessionist personal rheteroic into innocent minds.
For a public school teacher to state and put in print in the local newspaper, that our president is a dictator, should bring red flags to the school board.

This bill they passed will never hold up in court. Total waste of time and money for these legislatures to try and pass unconstituitional laws.

We are the United States of America. We are one of 50 states and with the privledges that come with being a part of the whole, is the agreement to abide by our constituition.
Individual states do not get to pick and choose which laws they will or will not abide by.
I am tired of the extremists pushing secessionists, treasonists, and nullification bills, laws, and rheteroic.

When anyone thinks that an Alaskan law enforcement person will get a class felony if they do not stop a federal agent from performing their duties, is completely out of touch with reality.

Presdient Obama a dictator........sheesh...what ignorance.

Suss
2389
Points
Suss 02/28/13 - 02:06 pm
1
1

Bob Bird, constitutional scholar

Scholar; as in pupil or as in a learned person?
Not sure of the source of the notice of this meeting. Do you wear your arms or leave them home for this rally? This will be like church where they pass the plate for an offering to the preacher, so is 10% the correct amount or does the weaponology faith have a formula that is different than tithing?

Norseman
2530
Points
Norseman 02/28/13 - 06:32 pm
1
0

KCHS is a gun free zone.

KCHS is a gun free zone. Anyone showing up packing will more than likely be arrested.

jlmh
293
Points
jlmh 03/01/13 - 06:24 pm
1
0

"Constitutionality"

"This HB69 will be found to be unconstitutional." -Raoulduke

Under what grounds? Cite the part of the Constitution you feel this law violates.

"The federal government has already been delegated these powers." -Raoulduke

No, it hasn't. Are you just making this stuff up as you go? I must have missed it when 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states ratified a bill to repeal the second amendment. That is, in fact, what it would take to change the Constitution. Existing federal gun control laws fall under the commerce clause. The federal government has been delegated the power to control interstate commerce, but not to infringe on citizens' rights to bear arms. New restrictions on current gun ownership wouldn't fall under the category of interstate commerce.

"The federal government can,and has amended more than a few rights since 9/11.Recent example being the Patriot Act.Where your 1st,4th,5th,6th,7th,8th,9th,and 10th amendments have been circumvented,or denied to citizens.There wasn't much complaining about those moves." -Raoulduke

I agree that much of the PATRIOT Act is unconstitutional, but there was in fact a deluge of complaints when it was first passed under the Bush administration. Unfortunately, some of it was extended under the Obama administration. I know of at least one case where the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government's actions under the PATRIOT Act violated the Fourth Amendment, and so a conviction was overturned. (See United States v. Antoine Jones.) The passage of an unconstitutional bill does not grant the federal government new powers; however, it takes a person with legal standing (who was actually affected by the law) to provoke a court to examine that law. So far, we don't even have new federal restrictions on gun ownership, so there's nothing for a federal official or agent to try to enforce. It's all theoretical. Only after such restrictions are passed (if ever) will a court be able to examine whether Alaska's new law that bans them is constitutional.

Raoulduke
1824
Points
Raoulduke 03/02/13 - 05:31 am
0
0

Obstuction

The very least this HB69 does,and will do is obstruction of justice plain,and simple.The first time a federal agent is hindered in their performance of duty.The state of Alaska will suffer the consequences.Maybe 40 years ago this state may have succeeded without federal aid,but not now.This state has been living off of so much federal money for so long.The states habit of giving huge tax breaks to the oil industry for little,or nothing in return. We will not survive as the state we know.Whose money will these tax breaks come from then? This HB69 has been a waste of tax payers dollars,and the time could have been used more fruitfully for the states citizenry.I personally would like to see a road to Nome.Something that can,and should be accomplished. A state can pass all the laws it wants,but history has proven.The states rights,or laws passed by the states to supersede federal law has failed.The folks who remember Gov.Wallace of the state of Alabama.Remember how his states rights prevailed.The states rights did not.The federal government moved in with the troops to enforce federal mandate.Is this something Alaska really wants to face?Remember!Alaska is running out of oil,and from my what I gather.There isn't anything to take it's place standing in the wings.Political shortsightedness running wild.Granted there is a very small percentage of Alaskan's.Who think they should be their own sovereign country.I refer to those people as traitors. Wake up people.Alaska is the 49th state of the United States of America.Considering Alaska to be anything else is an exercise of futility.

AKNATUREGUY
295
Points
AKNATUREGUY 03/02/13 - 10:28 am
1
1

FEDERAL AGENTS WILL ENFORCE ALL FEDERAL LAWS

YES, FEDERAL AGENTS WILL ENFORCE ALL FEDERAL LAWS AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, YOU SHOULD MOVE TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY-jlmh

What a farce and waste of time for Chenault to do such stupid acts. Even worse for Parnell to agree with the Bill. Nothing surprises me with the current Parnell adminstration.

Norseman
2530
Points
Norseman 03/02/13 - 12:42 pm
1
1

If the day ever comes that

If the day ever comes that this ever occurs, I'll be armed and ready to help the Federal Agents.
I will do this because first and foremost I am an American. I served my country during a time of war and represented the entire United States as well as my fellow comrades did.
We didn't just fight for our state, we fought for OUR country.

I may not like every law that congress passes, but by gawd I am proud to be an American and will do whatever is necessary to protect and defend her from those who wish to do her harm, foreign or domestic.

Have your rallys, pound your chest, but history will prove that you were on the wrong side of history.

Way too many men and women have given their lives and limbs for our country to be a free nation, all 50 states. Not for one or two, but all 50.

Be very careful when you think you will overthrow the federal government or it's laws. Just ask the last guest speaker at the amendment rally how well he is doing.

Raoulduke
1824
Points
Raoulduke 03/02/13 - 07:26 pm
0
0

Repeal

jlmh-Read the whole text.I never said anything about the repeal of the 2nd Amendment. I thought. We were talking about Alaska passage of HB69. Which was passed to prevent Federal agents from performing their duty.I do believe. HB69 is suppose to charge a federal agent with a felony for performing his duty.This I fear is obstruction at best.It matters not if the federal agent is enforcing new restrictions on gun OWNERSHIP. The federal government is not taking away,or preventing ownership of guns.When federal agents have to do their jobs. HB69 will not stand in their way.

number3
75
Points
number3 03/03/13 - 08:18 am
1
0

The Constitution

Federal officials and agents all take an oath to defend the constitution. They are not allowed to pick and choose which parts of the constitution they will or will not defend.

So which part of "shall not be infringed" don't you comprehend?

Raoulduke
1824
Points
Raoulduke 03/03/13 - 08:55 am
0
1

Update

There are some folks.Who believe that the 2nd amendment applies to the Federal government only-WRONG.The court in 2010 561 U.S. 3025 (Mc Donald vs.Chicago).The court ruled that the 2nd Amendment LIMITS states,and local governments to the same extent as the federal government.No body has mentioned this informed fact.

Norseman
2530
Points
Norseman 03/03/13 - 08:59 am
1
1

This issue was settled a long

This issue was settled a long time ago.

Let me refer you to GRANT vs LEE, Appomattox Court House, 1865.

Time to put your gun cleaning kit down and pick up an American history book.

Raoulduke
1824
Points
Raoulduke 03/03/13 - 09:14 am
1
1

long ago

Well stated Norseman

number3
75
Points
number3 03/04/13 - 07:42 am
1
0

Sam Adams

"If ye love wealth better than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude
better than the animating contest of freedom,
go home from us in peace.
We ask not your counsels or your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."

BigRedDog
647
Points
BigRedDog 03/04/13 - 09:54 am
1
0

Dick Act is Biggest thing against GUN-CONTROL

Get your attention, in 1902 the Congress said screw you gun grabbing liberals. That's when they whipped up the Dick Act of 1902 and guaranteed the militias of this great Nation will allways have the "Right to Keep and Bear Arms". Not just hunting Arms, but arms capable of defending oneself in battle. The Dick Act is there to guarantee tyrannical government can't do the things Tyrannical Governments do when they dis-arm the people. The arguement that other democratic nations have successfully screwed their countrymen of the ability to defend the homeland doesn't hold water. Because that is all they accomplished via gun control.
No invading power has EVER prevailed over an organized well armed militia supported by a majority of the population in the land being invaded. Do you understand what I just said and what that implies? It tells us that as long as America does allow it's citizens to bear arms and defend themselves we will NEVER be successfully invaded by force. Because you see our Enemies know that! You don't enter the house of a stong man, without first binding him.
I have a licence plate in the front window of my home. It reads "Forget 911, I dial .357" it says a lot more to potential assailants than a BIG No Guns allowed sign. The line on that no guns allowed thing really don't show that it works that well. No kidding the bad guys have figured it out, go where the other folks can't have a gun and shoot everybody you want? Does that work for you? Seriously open your mind and eyes to the lies you support as gospel.
Congress has chosen to honor the rights of the militia that has anchored the Democracy we enjoy today. That this democracy has been so recently abused at the poles is a reality some are blind to seeing. But don't let me see you reaching your blind hand for my guns because I might take you serious as a threat to the nation I love. Play radio ga ga and cry baby cry, but don't expect me to sit here and not worn you; it's treason to disarm the militia!

spybot
81
Points
spybot 03/05/13 - 01:03 pm
1
0

Prevent illegal access to guns

Interesting that we can have a discussion on creating a national database for background checks from gun dealers, gun shows and private transactions, to make sure that people who have engaged in illegal activity do not have access to guns.

Now, if a person gains "undocumented" access into the country, can that same person who is now known as an "undocumented worker" legally gain access through the new national registry as a qualified person to pass a background check and own a gun?

There is a lot of talk on one side of the national debate equation about how we need to restrict legal access to guns via a new national database to see who has been naughty and nice, and only get guns into the hands of those abide by the law.

Are we going to give a free pass in the national database to the 10 to 15 million "undocumented workers" now residing in our country - because if so that is a huge new market place for new gun owners... I mean, who would want to burden that large of populace with the task of gaining access to guns through "undocumented" methods and means when there could be an avenue to gain "legal" access to those same guns...

Back to Top

Spotted

Please Note: You may have disabled JavaScript and/or CSS. Although this news content will be accessible, certain functionality is unavailable.

Skip to News

« back

next »

  • title http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321268/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321253/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321248/
  • title http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321243/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321208/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/320593/
  • title http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321173/ http://spotted.peninsulaclarion.com/galleries/321163/
My Gallery

CONTACT US

  • 150 Trading Bay Rd, Kenai, AK 99611
  • Switchboard: 907-283-7551
  • Circulation and Delivery: 907-283-3584
  • Newsroom Fax: 907-283-3299
  • Business Fax: 907-283-3299
  • Accounts Receivable: 907-335-1257
  • View the Staff Directory
  • or Send feedback

ADVERTISING

SUBSCRIBER SERVICES

SOCIAL NETWORKING

MORRIS ALASKA NEWS