House Speaker Mike Chenault says federal law enforcement officers should be arrested in Alaska if they attempt to enforce any future federal law banning personal possession of assault rifles or large ammunition clips or if they attempt to register any Alaska firearm.
On Wednesday, just as President Obama was announcing new firearm-control initiatives in the aftermath of the child murders at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., Chenault offered his countermeasure in House Bill 69.
His bill would extend the reach of a law passed in 2010 by asserting that any firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition possessed by anyone in Alaska was not subject to federal law. The 2010 law only covered firearms and ammo manufactured in Alaska and it already was of dubious constitutional validity, though it’s never been challenged because no firearm is known to have bee
Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2013/01/16/2755382/federal-agents-would-face-arrest.html#storylink=cpy
If folks in Alaska are not subject to federal law does that mean I can move there and own a fully automatic AK-47? Or has state law already covered that?
And, if this is true, and I wish it was, Alaskans wouldn’t have to follow ANY federal laws. Or do they get to pick and choose?
I agree with what these guys are trying to do. But I wish they choose their words more carefully.