Favoring the constitutional right to bear arms over others' concerns about gun safety, Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a bill making Arizona the third state allowing people to carry a concealed weapon without requiring a permit...
I like how they put a photo of AR-15s right up top too. Last time I checked this was about concealed handguns, not concealed evil black rifles or short barreled rifles. They also give nine lines of text over to law enforcement objections, then slip in this two-line zinger:
However, the measure was supported by police unions representing rank-and-file officers, who said their best friend on the streets is a law-abiding citizen equipped to protect themselves or others.
Alaska may not have the best gun laws in the country for long! I noticed that AZ allows restaurant/bar carry so long as you are not drinking. That is something we could use up here so you don't have to worry about stopping for lunch at Moose Tooth while carrying.
We have restaurant carry.
ReplyDelete(from the Misconduct in the 5th statute)
(d) In a prosecution under (a)(2) of this section, it is
(1) an affirmative defense that
(C) the possession occurred at a place designated as a restaurant for the purposes of AS 04.16.049 and the defendant did not consume intoxicating liquor at the place;
http://touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title04/Chapter16/Section049.htm
It would seem the easiest way to tell is to see if the place has a "restaurant" license.
http://touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title04/Chapter11/Section100.htm
From what I remember the working rule is you can carry into a restaurant that has a separate bar in it (like Sullivan's, Spenard Roadhouse or Red Robin, to cover the spectrum) but technically cannot (should not?) enter the designated "bar portion" that has the full Beverage Dispensary license.
I'd like to see us go to a simpler "can't drink while carrying" rule with location left out and let the business decide if they want to let you in (remain in) while armed or not.
Except for the few bars that wand or have a detector it's not like the current misdemeanor rule has any real teeth regardless, you're facing at best a trespassing charge if you refuse to leave when asked.
Of course, in a perfect world we'd look to PA and a couple other states and note that allowing consumption under the DUI BAC limit while carrying hasn't caused the sky to fall.
Matthew,
ReplyDeleteThanks for joining in!
We do have restaurant carry, but as you point out the bar thing is a complication. For example, look at Moose Tooth where you have to walk past the bar area to get to some of the seating area. It just seems bizarre: seating area ok, sitting on barstool eating same meal not ok.
I'd prefer that rather being an affirmative defense that you were in a restaurant area, it was just plain legal. An affirmative defense means that you can still be arrested and charged. Now you're stuck in the situation of having to defend yourself and risk a conviction (even with a pretty slim chance of it) or plea bargain down to something else.
Carrying while intoxicated is already a MIW IV (Class A misdemeanor). So you could scrap the whole "guns in bars" thing altogether and still be able to bust people who carry drunk. It is a felony if you combine it with trespassing, so if someone gets drunk, is armed, and refused to leave... prohibited person time.
I agree that it is pretty much a non-issue with CCW. Who is going to know?
Cheers,
Chris
Wow, these comments get boring when we agree huh? =)
ReplyDeleteI'd also like "carry while intoxicated" specifically linked to the DUI BAC, right now, as far as I can tell, it is undefined in the weapons statute. Can't drive in public, can't carry in public, seems nice and clear.
Yup, I've thought that as well. While we are modifying MIW IV, I'd also add an affirmative defense for self-defense or DLP (critters) in your residence.
ReplyDeleteThe way it is written now, if you pick up a gun after having had a drink in your own home then you just violated MIW IV, even if the reason is 100% legitimate. I'm ok with drawing a bright red line about firearms in public while intoxicated, but you should be able to defend yourself at home even if you and the significant other split a bottle of wine at dinner without being automatically guilty of MIW IV. Of course, good luck in the civil and criminal cases if you have to defend your actions afterward... It will already be a tough case without the auto MIW IV issues.
I actually did a bit of research and best as I can tell, drunk shootings are actually a bigger problem than DUIs in AK... But, the (vast) majority of those shootings are suicides. Which makes me think it is more of a "substance abuse leads to suicide" problem than a "drunk people shooting each other" issue. So I don't think the affirmative defense would cause too many problems.