[Alabama Shooter]

This bill does a whole lot of nice things but has some issues that are being debated within the GOP ranks. Bill is widely expected to pass.

to provide for the issuance of a lifetime vehicle-only permit authorizing a person to carry a pistol in a vehicle; to require a sheriff to issue a lifetime vehicle-only permit and concealed pistol permit within a certain time frame; to increase the renewal period; to provide certain eligibility requirements for the issuance of permits; to provide for the revocation of a permit; to provide an appeals process for denials and revocations of permits; to further provide for the permit fee; to provide for the issuance of permits to applicants who are not United States citizens under certain conditions; to require a report from the National Instant Background Check System as part of the investigation process relating to the issuance of a concealed pistol permit; to amend Section 13A-11-85, Code of Alabama 1975, to authorize the Attorney General to enter into reciprocal agreements with other states for the mutual recognition of licenses to carry pistols;

Currently Alabama does not issue permits to non-residents. Permits are good for one year only and must be renewed annually for a charge (my county is $15). The bill has been amended to go from "lifetime" to five years instead. Five years would be great and save me the trouble of stopping in annually.

Reciprocity is also a mess. This bill would make it universal, even if the other state does not recognize the Alabama Permit.

to amend Section 40-12-143, Code of Alabama 1975, relating to the levy of business license taxes on persons participating in gun shows; to allow employees to transport or store a firearm in the employee's privately-owned motor vehicle under certain conditions; to prohibit an employer from inquiring whether the employee is transporting or storing a firearm in a private vehicle;

While this would be a big step it would not affect government agencies so employee carry would be restricted there. School employees are already not restricted from carry though. Bill also authorizes compensation for harassed/ fired employees.

to prohibit a business entity or property owner or legal possessor from establishing policies against persons transporting or storing a firearm or ammunition when the person is otherwise in compliance with all other applicable laws under certain conditions; to further provide for the carrying of pistols on private and public property; to provide a list of prohibited places where a person may not knowingly possess a firearm without permission;

The law has been unclear on this for while. Some places (rarely) post "no gun" signs. This has been the big sticking point on the debate. The bill will make the signs legal and enforceable by law.

Private property rights vs Gun Rights. If the bill gets shelved it will be over this.

This would be a big victory for open carry; the legality of is a an open debate depending upon what county/ city you live in. In regard to disorderly conduct:

(c) It shall be a rebuttable presumption that the mere carrying of a visible, holstered firearm in a public place, in and of itself, is not a violation of this section.

However guns would be prohibited at demonstrations.

Limits lawsuits and liability to businesses:

to specify that a person or business entity has no duty to guard against the criminal acts of a third party; to provide that an employer is not liable for the actions of its employees outside the line and scope of employment;

Bill would also prohibit mass release of permits:

To knowingly publish or release to the public in any form any information or records related to the licensing process, or the current validity of any license, except as authorized in this subsection or in response to a court order or subpoena, is a Class A misdemeanor.

Clarifies the use of Deadly Force. This will allow deadly force usage in any kind of burglary, theft or robbery.

person reasonably believes that another person is: "(1) Using or about to use unlawful deadly physical force.
"(2) Using or about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling while committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such dwelling.
"(3) Committing or about to commit a kidnapping in any degree, assault in the first or second degree, burglary in any degree, robbery in any degree, forcible rape, or forcible sodomy.
"(4) Using or about to use physical force against an owner, employee, or other person authorized to be on business property when the business is closed to the public while committing or attempting to commit a burglary, theft, or robbery.
"(4)(5) In the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or has unlawfully and forcefully entered, a dwelling, residence, business property, or occupied vehicle, or federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is in the process of sabotaging or attempting to sabotage a federally licensed nuclear power facility, or is attempting to remove, or has forcefully removed, a person against his or her will from any dwelling, residence, business property, or occupied vehicle when the person has a legal right to be there, and provided that the person using the deadly physical force knows or has reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act is occurring.

The legal presumption that a person using deadly physical force is
justified to do so pursuant to this subdivision does not apply if:
"a. The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, business property, or vehicle, such as an owner or lessee, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; "b. The person sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; "c.

The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or "d. The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer acting in the performance of his or her official duties.
"(b) A person who is justified under subsection (a) in using physical force, including deadly physical force, and who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and is in any place where he or she has the right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground. "(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a), a person is not justified in using physical force if: "(1) With intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, he or she provoked the use of unlawful physical force by such other person. "(2) He or she was the initial aggressor, except that his or her use of physical force upon another person under the circumstances is justifiable if he or she withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his or her intent to do so, but the latter person nevertheless continues or threatens the use of unlawful physical force.
"(3) The physical force involved was the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law.
"(d) A person who uses force, including deadly physical force, as justified and permitted in this section is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the force was determined to be unlawful.
"(e) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force described in subsection (a), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.

http://legiscan.com/AL/text/SB286

http://www.fox10tv.com/dpp/onpolitix...bates-gun-bill

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/...g_on_scho.html