Measure would let Arizona voters expand legal weapon choices

PHOENIX — Arizonans who want to possess every kind of weapon from pipe bombs to hand grenades would have to instead settle for getting automatic rifles, sawed-off shotguns and silencers under a proposal approved Wednesday by a House panel.

That’s not what Scottsdale Republican Rep. Alexander Kolodin originally proposed in his House Concurrent Resolution 2037. He contends there is a constitutional and God-given right to possess not just traditional firearms but also what he called “weapons of war.’’

Kolodin said he is under no illusion that if legislators adopt his proposals and voters approve, Arizonans would suddenly be allowed to have rockets, Molotov cocktails or improvised explosive devices, all felonies to possess under Arizona law. Whether state law is repealed or not, those would remain illegal under federal law.

But he said the state is under no obligation to help the feds enforce those laws by having parallel laws of its own. He pointed out the Arizona Constitution has even broader protections of the right to bear arms than the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

His proposed legislation took a turn, however, when Rep. Quang Nguyen, who chairs the Judiciary Committee through which the bill must pass, stripped out much of what Kolodin sought to make legal, at least under Arizona law. What was left after the action by the Prescott Republican are only the weapons already allowed by federal law.

Asked to explain his move, Nguyen responded, “Nope.’’

Kolodin went along. He said it came down to the political reality of what was needed to get his issue through the committee. In the end, he said he would rather have at least a partial victory to let Arizonans possess things that federal law already allows.

Like silencers. They are regulated — not banned — by the National Firearms Act. Possession requires passing a background check, being legally eligible to purchase a firearm, and paying $200 for a federal tax stamp.

But in Arizona, it’s a crime to have “a device that is designed, made or adapted to muffle the report of a firearm.” Under Kolodin’s House Concurrent Resolution 2037, if approved by voters, that prohibition would go away.

Ditto an Arizona law that makes it illegal to have a firearm capable of shooting more than one shot automatically. This, too, is legal under federal law with approval from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Also gone would be a state law that outlaws rifles and shotguns with an overall length of 26 inches, which also are allowed under federal law for those who can pass the background check and pay the federal tax stamp.

In that stripped-down form, the measure was approved by the committee on a 6-3 vote, with all three Democrats on the panel opposed.

Only Anne Thompson, a volunteer from the group Moms Demand Action, which lobbies for gun regulation, testified against the bill. But most of her comments were against the original bill to legalize weapons not permitted under federal law.

The now-amended measure now needs approval by the full Senate.

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

It’s now far less comprehensive than Kolodin wants, or thinks are the rights to which Arizonans are entitled. He said it comes down to whether the laws on the books here are constitutional.

Including those about “weapons of war.’’

“Our framers (of the Constitution) intended us to have those weapons of war to keep the government, which is our servant, in check,’’ Kolodin told colleagues on the committee.

“If the right to bear arms ‘shall not be infringed,’ how can we have a category of weapons that are prohibited?’’ he continued. “As a citizen of this state, I find it insulting.’’

Kolodin argued this is even bigger than constitutional guarantees, and that he wants to “reclaim the liberty that God has really given us because that’s where our rights come from.’’

His arguments about citizens having the same weapons as the government took on religious overtones, as he said the issue is “very personal’’ for him as a Jew.

“Historically, a lot of people haven’t cared for us Jews and, in fact, tried to kill us,’’ Kolodin said. “Right now our government ... is putting a restriction on my ability to defend myself and my family. And they’re not putting a cop outside of my door at night.’’

More to the point, he said that’s not the duty of the government. Instead, people have a duty to defend themselves, he said.

That ability, he said, is what made life better for his family than for Jews who stayed in Europe in the 20th century who “had an awful time.’’

“It’s time for the state to get out of the way,’’ said Kolodin.

What he was able to get through the committee after his bill was amended by Nguyen was just part of what he wanted. Still, he said removing the prohibitions that now exist in Arizona law against possession of what is permitted by federal law would be a victory.

“I will take my fully automatic rifles and my suppressors, thank you very much,’’ Kolodin said. “That’s a lot of what I wanted. A step at a time.’’