A House committee on Wednesday supported legislation reinforcing Arizona lawmakers’ decision not to allow cities or counties to destroy guns their police forces seize or buy back from the public.
The state Legislature last year required the courts to order local law enforcement agencies to sell firearms they acquire and forbid local governments from authorizing the destruction of these weapons. This year, gun-rights advocates are back with a tweak to the law to make sure there’s no getting around the intent, particularly as law enforcement agencies around the nation have hosted gun buyback events following the Connecticut massacre.
House Bill 2455 clarifies that the state has decision-making authority over gun regulation. It also clarifies that a state, county or local government must sell guns it receives in any manner unless they are deemed to be evidence in a crime. This includes weapons that individuals voluntarily hand over, even if their desire is for the weapon to be destroyed. The bill also eliminates the current law requirement that a court must authorize the sale and leaves the responsibility with the government agency holding the weapon.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Brenda Barton, R-Payson, passed the House Public Safety, Military and Regulatory Affairs Committee 5-3, with Republicans supporting it and Democrats opposing it. It now needs a vote of the full House before moving on to the Senate.
The committee voted down an amendment proposed by Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Phoenix, that would have created an exception in situations where an owner explicitly requests that the gun be destroyed.
Barton said the goal of the bill is to strengthen the state’s authority over local governments in regulating firearms.
“We’re not really breaking new ground here,” she said. “It’s just simply to clarify the existing statutes and strengthen the state’s preemption authority.”
Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, said the only substantive change to the bill is to say that the court doesn’t have to order the sale of acquired weapons. State law already says cities and counties can’t destroy and must sell these weapons, he said.
“It takes the court out of the mandate, but still mandates that the firearms be sold,” he said.
He said if someone wants to have a firearm destroyed, they can do that themselves or take it to a private business to do it for them.
The National Rifle Association, Arizona State Rifle and Pistol Association, Gun Owners of Arizona and the Arizona Citizens Defense League support the bill. The League of Arizona Cities and Towns opposes it.
Citizens Defense League President Dave Copp said some attorneys have interpreted the current law’s use of the word “abandoned” to not apply to weapons that are voluntarily surrendered. Tucson held a gun buyback event in January based on that interpretation. This bill fixes that, he said.
“If you were to go to a buyback and give away your weapon to a city or state or county, you’ve abandoned it,” he said. “We think this bill makes it pretty clear that when the Legislature passed a law saying you’ve got to sell thse guns, it meant it. But just in case, here we are again.”
He said local governments should not be spending money to destroy guns when they could make money selling them. They must be sold to federally licensed firearms dealers, who must conduct background checks on buyers, he said.
Phoenix resident Leonard Clark, who has been a vocal opponent of state legislation to limit gun regulations, spoke against the bill at the hearing.
“I’m in support of the Second Amendment, but we have a right to destroy weapons that are confiscated, just like we destroy drugs,” he said. “It’s not right to tell municipalities, counties that they don’t have a right to destroy a firearm that might have been used in the commission of a crime.”
Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox said she’s held three gun buyback events in recent years, “and we’ve taken over 650 guns off the streets.”
“The people who come to these gun buybacks are family members who have children of an age where they do not want guns in the home anymore, or who fear their adolescent children may be tempted to take the gun into the street,” she said. “They would never fathom that the guns they turn in would be recirculated. They want them off the streets.”
She said these programs do not require anyone to turn in a gun.
“It’s a voluntary action, an opportunity for a community who wants to get rid of weapons to have a safe, legal way to do it,” she said.
Gallego, a gun owner, voted against the bill.
“Guns do not have rights. I have a right to bear arms. And I should do what I want with my property,” he said, adding that an individual should have the right to ask a police department to destroy their weapon for them. “I think we are infringing upon that.”
Rep. Jamescita Peshlakai, D-Cameron, also voted against the bill.
“The everyday, average citizen doesn’t have a lobbyist to speak for them,” she said. “When they surrender their weapon, it’s under the assumption that it will be destroyed.”
