Gun rights expanded in Arizona House bills

The 33-25 vote came over objections of foes, all but one of them Democrats. They said HB 2320 permits government agencies to keep their buildings gun-free solely by buying metal detectors and having security guards at each public entrance. Rep. Jennifer Benally, D-Tuba City, said the County Supervisors Association told her the cost just to those governments would be $59 million a year in what she called “unfunded mandates.”

And that, she said, is on top of more than $30 million in shifts of state obligations to counties in the new budget.

But Rep. Brenda Barton, R-Payson, said there really is no mandate on any government agency to spend even a nickel. She said they have another choice: Let those who have been issued a state permit after undergoing a background check bring those weapons into a building.

“In the event of a heinous situation happening, would you not like to have somebody there to help back up the situation?” she said.

Thursday’s vote sends the measure to the Senate.

The debate at one point spilled into the area of theology.

“The Second Amendment says that we have a right that’s God-given to us to defend ourselves,” said Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert.

“If I have a God-given right to defend myself, and if the Second Amendment recognizes and defends that right against government, then if government wants to take away my ability to defend myself, they have an obligation to protect me,” he continued. And Farnsworth said he has no problem if it costs money to install metal detectors and hire guards.

“It should be expensive,” he said.

“God didn’t write the Constitution,” responded Rep. Sally Ann Gonzales, D-Tucson.

That only provoked Farns-

worth to quote from the Declaration of Independence, which says men are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,” including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Farnsworth said that, by definition, includes self-defense.

In a separate 34-24 vote, the House agreed to enter into compacts with other states to prevent future lawmakers and even voters from enacting laws on the transfer of firearms that are any stricter than federal laws. HB 2431, which also goes to the Senate, is designed to prevent legislation and initiatives to require background checks before one person can sell a weapon to another.

But it was the debate over guns in buildings that resulted in the most debate.

Current law permits those who operate government buildings to declare them off-limits to weapons solely by posting a sign and providing storage lockers. Barton said that hardly keeps criminals from being armed.

“Once a sign goes on a building and says ‘No weapons beyond this point,’ is it really that piece of paper that is defending you from someone entering the building?” she asked.

Barton said there are limits to her legislation.

Arizona law permits any adult to carry a concealed weapon. But HB 2320 applies only to the more than 231,000 Arizonans who have gone the extra step of training and background check to get a state permit.

The measure also does not apply to public schools, community colleges, universities and any public event with a liquor license.

But Rep. Randall Friese, D-Tucson, said that still leaves lots of other places. He said guns should not be allowed “in the library where my child sits in the aisle reading Charlie Brown.”

Counties would not be the only ones who would have to incur costs if they want to keep guns out.

Legislative budget analysts put the cost to state government at anywhere between $10 million and $16.9 million the first year, what with the cost of new equipment. In subsequent years, the figure would be between $9.4 million and $15.7 million annually.

And that does not include costs to the more than 90 cities and towns.

The same measure was vetoed three prior times by Jan Brewer when she was governor specifically because of the costs. Doug Ducey, the current holder of that office, has declined to comment on whether he would sign the measure.