Starting Wednesday, handgun owners won’t need permits to carry concealed weapons in the seven Alaska cities where they’re still required. There also will be no more restrictions on keeping a firearm in a vehicle.
A new state anti-gun control law that goes into effect will essentially bar municipalities from passing gun laws that are more restrictive than state law.
What the NRA wants to do is prevent cities from passing more restrictive laws in the future. It calls it 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 NRA spokeswoman Kelly Hobbs. “Without it, it creates an unfair, inconsistent and confusing patchwork of local firearm ordinances.”
“There are lots of people, myself included, we really value our constitutional rights,” said Anchorage Police Chief Walter Monegan. “But if we had the same enthusiasm to also support our constitutional responsibilities, then I would be less concerned over this issue.”
Chenault argues that even though state law now does not specifically prohibit weapons in municipal buildings, it does prohibit them in state buildings, so a municipal law wouldn’t be considered more restrictive.
The concept of state precedence over cities, like federal law over state, usually prevails in appellate courts. That’s “usually”.
Before the discussion falls into a debate about the ambiguity of the 2nd amendment and to whether it applies to militias or to individuals, let me clear something up. There is more than one constitution in the US. Every state has one too.
And let me add this, while a state’s constitution cannot give less rights than the US Constitution, it can give more.
For example, my state’s Constitution says the following about arms: “Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.”
Thus there is no ambiguity about whether it applies only to militias. Thus, in Michigan it’s incredibly easy to get a concealed weapons permit.
Alaska’s Constitution gives even more rights: “The individual right to keep and bear arms shall not be denied or infringed by the State or a political subdivision of the State.”
That seems pretty clear to me. The state cannot infringe anyone’s right to bear arms. Once again, there is no ambiguity about militias.
In most states, this would bother me. In Alaska, having lived there, it doesn’t. Guns are a part of life up there, and virtually a requirement to live outside of a city.
I think this thread should be about Ima’s post. Where’s the left-wing nut we know and love?
Great idea. I can’t wait for a similar law to be passed in California, so all the law abiding and community benefiting members of neighborhood associations, such as “Crips” and “Bloods”, or highly mobile “Hells Angels” and various other “Latino vehicle clubs” can legally carry their concealed weapons and quickly come to our aid when we are in trouble. I would also feel so safe knowing that the obnoxious temperamental ahole that lives down the block can carry a concealed weapon to defend himself against the percieved grievances confronting his life.
Why is Alaska so dangerous that people need to carry concealed weapons at will?
Society was more polite when most people carried pocket guns. I just keep thinking about those citizens shooting it out with bank robbers. Nothing like hundreds of rounds being fired by amateurs on a busy city street. The world is a different place than it was in 1890. Most people are still jerks, but with modern population density it’s a more target rich environment.
“The more laws, the less justice.”
— Marcus Tullius Cicero
Hey, thanks Christopher, I like that one. Nobody and no government gave me my rights, they are mine, and I don’t like them taken away.
“Great idea, hope it catches on in other states.”
Not to pick on Christopher, but is it my imagination, or are there more and more comments from people who seem not to have read the posts?
“Alaska will be the 44th state to have such a law on its books.”
I truely believe that gun laws only keep guns away from responsible owners.
The lawless always seem to find one when they want one.
I still want Duhbya impeached!
Here in Florida they have eliminated the concept of last santuary. If some crook enters your home uninvited – and you feel threatened – or a jury will believe you were – bang – instant justice.
James Hill, the problem you have is that you think in black and white, better put as Right and Left. Unlike you I’m not a dogmatic robot. I think for myself. Thus, sometimes I agree with the Left and sometimes I agree with the Right.
You keep bowing to your party’s line. I’ll keep thinking for myself.
At least one thing Communists, Nazis and feudal systems had in common was the disarming of the citizens. Today we see these governmental systems as despotic. In their view no part of our lives is private or trumps the arbitrary demands of ‘greater good’, depending upon the whims of whoever is in power, witness Hilter, Stalin, Mao, Tito, Cambodia, Vietnam and the list goes on and on.
Why is it always the Leftist / Political correct that seem to want to tell be what they should and shouldn’t do? The leftist believe in the controlled and orderly processing of individual in death camps {Gulags / Concentration Camps / Homeless Camps } , in that way they hope to control who is eliminated, rather than an armed society where everyone is empowered to protect themselves. Their single mindedness is reflective of a religious belief rather than a rational and logical reflection.
Maybe weapons licenses should be like pilots licenses, you don’t get to carry a hawgleg until you spend some money and time on how to actually handle the beast. I can’t refer to a driver’s license; there are already over forty thousand people a year killed at the hands of goof ball drivers in this country.
That “triggers” a thought: Why not require prospective drivers and shooters to take a combined driver, road rage and weapons course? I suspect more people die on the highways than in shootings, maybe we can resolve both issues at the same time.
Worked for a couple of first call (dead human bodies, the removal/transport of) services for a period of years.
When we were dispatched to remove a body at the scene of a shooting death (home invasions, burglaries, robberies etc), one common thread became clear.
If the home owner owned a gun, we carried out the bad guy…if the home owner didn’t have a gun, we carried out the home owner.
I am very proud of the Alaska gun laws, or the lack of them. I just wish all the other states had less gun laws. I live in Mississippi which isnt as bad as some states. I have a very strong desire to come and visit Alaska in the near future, Untill then keep up the good work.
Thank our lucky nowhere for the NRA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anyway, don’t get put into any Alaskan death camps on concentration camps. They have those somewhere up there, and a mental institution housing over two million people. Plus, I understand they might be completing the death and con camps soon and they were working on them last I read. So it would be a good idea to spread work about this, about keeping people out of mental institutions and off of medications that lead you there and everything else needed to prevent lots of people going into Death Camps.
They are not a revolving door, and when you go into those, you don’t tusually come out. Also, you can read my blogs for some more info but I don’t have a lot of info on the camps specifically. They last claimed they had wound down on building one but they are talking transfers of people up there, to build them and to live in them, but not for very long, as I found out later. TAKE CARE!!!!!!!!!!!!
And take good care of your guns.
Love,
Karen Cole-Peralta
President
Rainbow Writing, Inc.
klp
not exactly concealed guns needed in alaska but it wont freak ppl out as much if they dont know you have one and they are needed in basic life in alaska for the moose threat and or bear threat. carring a gun for the honest adverage alaskan isnt people protection, its animal protection.