Alabama legislative committees give mixed reception to gun violence bills
Left to right: Alabama Senate President Pro Tem Garlan Gudger, R-Cullman; Alabama House Speaker Nathaniel Ledbetter, R-Rainsville and Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey applaud during a press conference at the Alabama State Capitol on Feb. 12, 2025 promoting a law enforcement package in the Legislature. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector)
A handful of bills targeting gun violence made it through Alabama House and Senate committees Wednesday as Gov. Kay Ivey held a press conference with mayors, legislators and law enforcement officials urging the passage of a public safety package.
The House and Senate Judiciary Committees approved a bill that would make it a state crime to possess devices that can enable semi-automatic firearms to fire like automatic ones; a bill to expand the number of people who can be denied a gun license, and a bill allowing people to voluntarily surrender firearms.
Ivey and legislators said they plan to make the package — which also includes legislation expanding immunity for police officers and attempts to improve police officer recruitment — a priority in the current session.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
'Clearly, Alabama is committed to combating public safety threats,' Ivey said at a press conference on Wednesday to urge passage of the bills. She also said that the package of bills that were proposed before the start of the session is 'a prudent step to accomplish the goals.'
However, some firearm bills before the committees were delayed, in part due to protests from gun rights groups.
The Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday morning approved SB 116, sponsored by Sen. Will Barfoot, R-Pike Road, that would make it a state crime to possess or distribute firearm conversion devices, commonly referred to as 'Glock switches,' which enable semi-automatic pistols to fire as fully automatic weapons.
The Judiciary Committee approved the bill in a bipartisan vote, following testimony from Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin, who urged lawmakers to take action against the devices. Birmingham police say Glock switches were used in a mass shooting in Birmingham's Five Points neighborhood last September that left at least four people dead and 17 injured.
'There are too many grieving mothers who have lost their child because of the use of these machine gun devices. Too many children have lost parents because of these machine gun conversion devices,' Woodfin said to the committee.
Glock switches are already illegal under federal law. The bill would allow state and local law enforcement to bring charges under Alabama statutes rather than relying on federal prosecution.
Committee members said the change would give local authorities greater enforcement power against violent crime.
Sen. Rodger Smitherman, D-Birmingham, spoke in support of the bill, saying that it's time to 'move our laws into the 2025 year' and adapt to changing technology.
'That's the number one thing we've got to do, get control of our communities, get control of our streets, and get control of these situations,' he said.
Sen. Sam Givhan, R-Huntsville, said he is concerned the bill's wording is confusing, particularly language stating that a firearm 'can be readily restored' to fire automatically.
'What I don't want is everybody that owns a Glock that is… you know, this thing can be twisted to make that criminal,' Givhan said. 'And so I think what we need to do is, I don't know how the exact language [should be], but we need to clarify that being readily restored does not mean just simply adding the Glock switch.'
Sen. Bobby Singleton, D-Greensboro, said that the bill was needed after the state eliminated the requirement for concealed carry permits in 2022. Singleton said that weakened law enforcement's ability to combat gun violence.
'We just can't stop and ask them about their guns. If the police had that tool in that toolbox, maybe along with that, we will have a better tool to be able to stop them before they get to that point,' Singleton said.
The committee also approved SB 119, also sponsored by Barfoot, that expands the categories of those prohibited from having firearms.
State law prohibits firearm possession by those convicted of a violent crime, domestic violence or a violent offense, or are the target of a valid protection order because of domestic abuse or suffer from a mental illness. The bill would expand that prohibition to people charged with a crime of violence; a misdemeanor domestic violence offense; or a violent offense and was released pending trial.
It also enhances the penalty for people convicted of firing into a building with people. Currently, those convicted of that offense face a Class B felony, punishable by up to 20 years in jail and a fine of up to $30,000. The bill would make it a Class A felony, punishable by a life sentence in prison.
Both measures head to the full Senate for consideration.
The House Judiciary Committee approved HB 216, sponsored by Rep. Russell Bedsole, R-Alabaster, that allows individuals to enter into an agreement with people who have a federal firearm license to take possession of their firearms for a specified time if they believe they are a threat to themselves.
It also provides civil immunity for local law enforcement and people with a federal firearm license when they take ownership of people's firearms. Bedsole said his legislation will eventually be part of a program called the Safer Together Program that will be formalized in the future.
'This program is designed to target any of those individuals who are experiencing suicidal ideations and who feel it is in their best interest, if they surrender their weapon, that it can be secured in a secure facility set up under the guise of this program,' Bedsole said. 'They can surrender it and get it back whenever they want.'
The bill allows license holders, particularly those who have stores that sell guns, to go into the community and discuss the program that allows people to surrender their firearms.
'What this bill does is pave the way,' he said. 'It offers some liability protection, specifically related to the returning of the firearm to that individual who has voluntarily surrendered it when they come to get it back.'
Two firearms bills were scheduled for discussion in the House Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee but not debated. HB 150, sponsored by Rep. Phillip Ensler, D-Montgomery, prohibits people from giving a 'deadly weapon' and ammunition to those they believe are under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Those who do could be convicted of a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $6,000 fine.
HB 103, sponsored by Rep. Barbara Drummond, D-Mobile, would effectively require firearm owners with children living in their home to safely store their weapons. A child who brought an unsecured weapon to a school could lead to Class A misdemeanor charges for the parent, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $6,000 fine.
The House Judiciary Committee also delayed a vote on HB 58, sponsored by Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, that would make it a Class A misdemeanor to not tell a police officer a person was in possession of a firearm during a stop.
The bill that ended concealed carry permit requirements in 2022 included a provision that requires people to inform law enforcement when they are carrying a firearm. But the Alabama Attorney General's Office said in a May 2023 opinion that that part of the law is unenforceable because the requirement did not have an accompanying penalty.
Gun rights groups protested the proposal.
'We believe that people should not be compelled to provide potentially self-incriminating information to law enforcement, and in situations where a person is carrying a concealed firearm and is pulled over and asked the question, they may be reluctant to share information out of fear that it could lead to unnecessary scrutiny or lead to criminal charges, even if they are legally carrying a firearm,' said Kelby Seanor, state director for the National Rifle Association.
He also said the NRA also had concerns that the bill infringes on the Second Amendment because it creates a criminal penalty for people who are legally carrying a firearm.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Axios
13 minutes ago
- Axios
Black Caucus chair says Trump's actions on L.A. are impeachable
Congressional Black Caucus chair Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) said Tuesday she believes President Trump mobilizing the National Guard and deploying Marines to Los Angeles rises to the level of an impeachable offense. Why it matters: It's a break with House Democrats' general aversion towards impeachment from the head of one of their most powerful groups. The comment comes amid growing animosity between Democrats and the Trump administration over the president's use of law enforcement to carry out a campaign of mass deportations. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Driving the news: During a press conference, Clarke was asked if Trump's actions to quell protests in L.A. rise to the level of an impeachable offense "I definitely believe it is," she responded, "But we'll cross that bridge when we get to it." Clarke and other Democrats have argued that Trump has violated the U.S. Constitution by mobilizing the National Guard over Newsom's objections. Reality check: Democrats are highly unlikely to pursue an organized impeachment effort against Trump any time soon. Two rank-and-file members, Reps. Shri Thanedar (D-Mich.) and Al Green (D-Texas), have spearheaded their own rogue impeachment initiatives, but most Democrats have dissociated themselves with those efforts. Most Democrats are clear-eyed that impeachment would be doomed to failure with Republicans in control of Congress — and they often note that Trump won in 2024 despite previously being impeached twice. What they're saying: House Democratic Caucus chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) told reporters at a subsequent press conference, "I've said before that ... House Democrats aren't focused on impeachment today."


Axios
13 minutes ago
- Axios
Impeachment wars
Rep. Jasmine Crockett's mere mention of a possible impeachment inquiry into President Trump has touched off negative reactions from some colleagues. "I think she's going to turn off a lot more people than gain," a House Democrat told us. Why it matters: House Democratic leaders are staying neutral. But many Democrats are allergic to the word after they impeached Trump twice only for him to return to power with full control of the government. Crockett (D-Texas), asked in a local news interview if she would pursue impeachment if Democrats retook the House in 2026 and she became Oversight Committee chair, said she would "absolutely at least do an inquiry." The other three candidates for the ranking member job on Oversight, Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) and Kweisi Mfume (D-Md.), told us they wouldn't go that far. 👿 "Turning this ranker race into a proxy for impeachment is unhelpful and unfair to her colleagues," said a House Democrat who predicted Republicans will "try to motivate their base by saying that a Democratic majority will inevitably lead to impeachment." Crockett told us the term "impeachment inquiry" would stress to the public the "next level of gravity" of the subject matter — such as Trump's pardons for big money allies and the Qatari jet scandal. "A lot of times we as Democrats can overthink stuff," Crockett said. "A lot of people ... felt like [Oversight Committee chair] James Comer was an embarrassment. But at the end of the day, who won the House?" The bottom line: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries deferred to House Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), whose panel, he said, "has jurisdiction over impeachment."


Fox News
16 minutes ago
- Fox News
NY lawmaker lambastes failed commemoration of Oct 7 attack, as Dem leadership accused of 'antisemitism'
The New York assemblyman behind an effort to formally commemorate the Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack in Israel lambasted leadership for tanking what was supposed to be a "poignant" bill remembering the tragedy. Assemblyman Lester Chang, R-Brooklyn – one of the few GOP members from New York City in the 103-47 Democratic-majority chamber – said he had been working on a resolution for New York state to officially remember the terror attack since hostage negotiations began a year ago. "I'm a Navy veteran of 24 years and I did a tour in Afghanistan. So I understand what war is all about," said Chang. "I've seen atrocities out there." Once American figures like then-candidate Donald Trump began helping hostage negotiations, Chang said he directed his staff to craft a message – which he said took more than a month of back-and-forth to make sure it was "balanced" and did not have a partisan streak. "We submitted it in January, as a resolution, and it was rejected… because [leadership] said it was 'controversial,'" Chang said. "We were astounded but not surprised. So we converted it to a bill," he said, adding that, in the end, a bill would be better because a resolution only commemorates an event for that year, while a bill would codify the remembrance for eternity. With a handful of Democratic co-sponsors, Chang and colleagues believed they had the right balance to attempt to put it up for a vote, but as the New York Post reported, it was reportedly ultimately blocked by House Speaker Carl Heastie, D-Bronx, and other top Democrats. Chang said the bill, destined for the smaller governmental operations committee, was redirected to the larger Ways and Means committee, and that four members were "switched out." The top Republican on that panel, Assemblyman Ed Ra, told the New York Post that remembering Oct. 7 and/or combating antisemitism should never be "political." Republican Assemblyman Ari Brown, who, like Ra, represents Long Island, accused Albany Democrats of "veiled antisemitism," telling the Post the legislature is "rotten" with it. The assembly also tanked a resolution from Brown that complimented Chang's bill. Compounding that was, as Chang described, no GOP bills have been successfully put through the process at all this session. "Having me as a Republican [sponsor] – that would [procedurally] choke them – not because of me, the person, but as a member of that party." Chang said he would just as soon "give this bill to a Democrat" to sponsor if it meant commemorating the Oct. 7 attack. He added that, as a person of Chinese ancestry who represents largely Asian and Italian Bensonhurst, he has no religious horse in the race. "That should make it more poignant as a non-Jewish person pushing this bill in a mostly Christian and Buddhist district," he said. At least seven Democrats did come out in support of the Oct. 7 remembrance legislation, all of whom hail from New York City. Senate Minority Leader Rob Ortt, R-Niagara Falls, echoed Chang's concerns in comments to Fox News Digital. "Many New Yorkers had loved ones injured or worse in the terror attacks in Israel on Oct. 7," Ortt said. "The least we can do is commemorate this tragic day." "Instead of taking commonsense action, Albany Democrats would rather play politics, and have time and again refused to defend our Jewish brothers and sisters." Fox News Digital reached out to Heastie for comment and response to the allegations but did not hear back.