Posted on 10/16/2005 1:47:00 PM PDT by freepatriot32
JUNEAU, Alaska — Starting Wednesday, a new anti-gun-control law in Alaska will allow handgun owners to carry concealed weapons without a permit in the seven Alaska cities where permits are now required.
Gun owners will be allowed to keep their firearms in their vehicle, even if the car is parked on private property where the owner has a no-gun policy.
And, some police chiefs say, local ordinances that ban guns from public buildings such as city halls will no longer be enforceable.
Alaska’s new law forbids municipalities from passing gun laws that are more restrictive than state law.
The National Rifle Association, which helped Republican state Rep. Mike Chenault draft the new law, said it wants to prevent cities from passing restricting laws in the future. It’s what the organization calls state pre-emption, and Alaska will be the 44th state to have such a law on its books.
“We are looking to make it uniform to all 50 states,” said spokeswoman Kelly Hobbs from the NRA’s Fairfax, Va., headquarters. “Without it, it creates an unfair, inconsistent and confusing patchwork of local firearm ordinances.”
Chenault said a law-abiding citizen should be able to carry a firearm wherever he wants to, but in Alaska, that citizen may be breaking the law and not even know it.
“You could leave Homer with a gun in your vehicle and find yourself in conflict with laws in other municipalities just by driving through those municipalities,” he said.
The part of the law that most concerns Alaska police chiefs is the lifting of bans on guns in public buildings. That could leave government workers inside vulnerable to attack, said Anchorage Police Chief Walter Monegan.
“There are lots of people, myself included, we really value our constitutional rights,” Monegan said. “But if we had the same enthusiasm to also support our constitutional responsibilities, then I would be less concerned over this issue.”
Across the state in Bethel, Police Chief Ben Dudley said he also is concerned that he will no longer have the option of charging people with entering a municipal building with a weapon. But he’s more philosophical on the effects of that city law when it comes to stopping somebody who means to do harm.
“If there were people with bad intentions entering into municipal buildings, the law isn’t going to stop those people anyway,” Dudley said. “They’re going to stick a pistol down their pants anyway.”
The new law would allow cities to keep guns out of places beyond a restricted access point, such as a metal detector, but the chiefs say their cities can’t afford to staff and equip such points.
Plus, “It runs counter to the intent of public buildings to establish the checkpoints,” said Juneau Police Chief Richard Gummow.
Chenault said his interpretation of the new law differs. State law now does not specifically prohibit weapons in municipal buildings, but it does in state buildings. If municipalities pass their own weapons bans for public buildings, those laws shouldn’t be considered any more restrictive than the state’s ban, he said.
But he acknowledged that it may take a court challenge to see if his interpretation is correct.
The police chiefs are less concerned about the concealed-weapons permits. Two years ago, the Legislature removed the requirement for a permit to carry a concealed weapon, but the state continues to issue them. The NRA says those permits are still required in seven cities: Anchorage, Bethel, Juneau, Petersburg, Sitka, Valdez and Wasilla.
Even opponents of the law seem fine with getting rid of the permit requirements.
But state Sen. Hollis French, D-Anchorage, who voted against the bill, said he objects to its stance of putting gun rights over private property rights. The law says a government or person cannot create a rule that would prohibit someone from keeping a gun inside a car, wherever the car is.
“In that tension between the legitimate right to protect yourself, and, for me, the more absolute right to do as you see fit with your property, this tips the balance a little too far toward guns,” French said.
Some people need to go back to bed and dream in the land of... OZ. Or Alice in The Looking Glass.
(rolling eyes in the 10th magnitude)
BTW... have you ever touched a firearm?
That is the cureative question in this dialogue. Answer the question.
Jeez dude, you totally miss the point.
The point isn't about gun rights..the point is: Does a private property owner have the right to allow or disallow certain objects on their property?
It's a yes or no question.
This has nothing to do with guns, and yes, I do own a gun and have a CCW permit. It's a Model 96 Beretta .40 cal. Would you like to see a photo of one?
Oh please. Claiming a "higher understanding" and then a hand-waving dismissal is a sure sign of someone without any real argument to back up their position. I see this all the time at liberal sites I lurk at, but it's a pretty rare thing here. That makes you pretty special.
Once I learn something that's patently untrue?
The Bill of Rights applies to EVERYONE. Plain and simple. The Second Amendment says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". It does not say "except by", or "except for". Anything else is an opening for government abuse and roundabout nullification of the right to keep and bear arms. Which is exactly what we've seen happening.
If your logic was correct, then the owner of this website could not ban a poster...because that would be an infringement on their right of free speech.
No. Once again, you are not getting it. It is not that hard a distinction to understand. The owner of this website can decide who is and is not allowed here. That is not the same thing as deciding what they can and cannot say.
Back to the Second Amendment issue (and away from your attempt at sidetracking): Say you have declared your property to be "gun free". If you do not check everyone at the door, and later find that someone does have a weapon on your private property, the MOST you can do is make that person leave. You are NOT empowered to confiscate their weapon from them or in any other way deny them their right to keep and bear arms.
And besides all that, you'd have to be especially stupid to declare your property "gun free" without specifically checking everyone at the door because all that would accomplish is ensure the only armed people on your property are there with ill intentions. I'm not saying this practice isn't common, just that it's stupid.
You have the right of it my FRiend. Lots of freepers believe, as do the Dems, that our government should play a major role in the ordering and arranging of society. They don't wish to admit that if we give it that power for a just cause, that it will in time use it for one that is unjust.
Not that forcing you to allow something on your property that you don't want is a just cause IMO.
I'm speaking as a life member of the NRA, btw.
This is not NYC where we live. We are rural bumpkins with a differing set of standards from city slickers and gangsters.
BTW, where do you live? This may cause shade a light on the conversation. Just curious...
I live in Coral Gables (Miami), Fla, where CCW was passed in the 80's, to cries of "there will be blood in the streets" if it passes.
By the way, I'm against CCW, because I don't think a law-abiding American should need the permission of the Gov't to carry a weapon. The Govt can pretty much take away any license arbitrarily.
I am in agreement with the Alaska law on that, and in full agreement with the non-laws in Vermont regarding guns.
You know what? In my opinion this jerk is a lib with no guts. I tried to reason logic with him... Forget it. When he gets shot in Los Angeles, CA.. wherever, I will have no quallms. My assessment is that he is a looney second grade skrewl-teacher. /endofassessment
Remember Chester from Gunsmoke? Just start walking like him ;o)
Well. The answer is simple. Move to Miami, or New Orleans. Then you can throw spitballs at all of your friends when they come in to rape your wife, steal your goods, and subsequently burn down your house.
But... then again, liberals love this process.
Could eliminating the permit system make it more difficult to travel to other states, some of which require that you have a permit from your home state?
what areas would be considered Liberal in Alaska? Around the universities? Wasilla?
Why would I want to throw spitballs at them, when I have a gun?
Please come to California and get it passed here! Please!
Maybe you missed my point. If so, I apologise.
I have, at this point, 7,000 rounds of assorted ammo, featured for 18 varying weapons.
BTTT!!!!!!!
I'm asking Freepers to join the NRA and put the initials in their tagline. Thanks.
WoooHooo!! Way to go Alaska!!! So many more states to go... : ) <<< me
Thackney ping!
Lucky...
Of course they're morons - They'r heads of police organizations. You don't get to be the head of a police organization by demonstrating independent or non-governmental thought. "I was just following orders" should be these guys' motto.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.