logo
Alabama House committee rejects bill making parents liable when children bring guns to school

Alabama House committee rejects bill making parents liable when children bring guns to school

Yahoo20-02-2025
Rep. Barbara Drummond, D-Mobile, speaks during a debate in the Alabama House of Representatives on Feb. 12, 2025 at the Alabama Statehouse in Montgomery, Alabama. A House committee rejected a bill sponsored by Drummond that would have imposed criminal penalties on parents of children who bring unauthorized firearms to school. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector)
Lawmakers Wednesday halted a bill that could have made parents and guardians who don't secure their firearms criminally liable if their children bring those guns to school.
The House Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee rejected HB 103, sponsored by Rep. Barbara Drummond, D-Mobile, that would have subjected parents to a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $6,000 fine if their child brings an unauthorized firearm to school.
'I want you to know that this is not anti-gun bill or a gun control bill,' she said to members of the committee. 'This is a pro-parenting and pro-schools bill to help us prevent children from bringing their parents' guns to school campuses.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Drummond introduced the legislation after she noticed an increasing number of incidents in which children brought firearms to school.
The bill would require parents to attach a trigger lock device to a gun or storing the firearm in a lock box that requires a key or some kind of combination to unlock.
This is the third consecutive year that Drummond introduced legislation that held parents responsible should their children gain access to their firearm and subsequently bring the weapon to school with them.
The 2023 version of her legislation made it a Class C felony, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $15,000, for someone to have a firearm after they were convicted of a violence offense or had a protection order because of domestic abuse.
That version also had a section that made it a Class A misdemeanor for minors, or those with a drug or alcohol addiction, to have a firearm. Parents could also be convicted of a Class C felony if they fail to safely secure their firearms, and their children bring the weapon to school.
In 2024, Drummond downgraded the punishment to a Class A misdemeanor if parents fail to secure their firearms and their children bring it to school. It also left in place the other elements pertaining to people who had been convicted of a violent offense, along with punishing minors and people with an addiction to alcohol and drugs.
In the most recent version, Drummond stripped the bill down to criminal liability for parents who fail to secure their firearms.
The bill was approved by the House Judiciary Committee last year.
Democrats on the House Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee unanimously voted in favor of the legislation, but Drummond failed to get enough support from Republicans.
'My basic opposition to this particular bill is that it applies a criminal offense based on another person's actions,' said Rep. Ginny Shaver, R-Leesburg. 'No matter what you do, if the child does take a gun to school, that person's action is then going to trigger a criminal penalty on someone else.'
Drummond then warned her colleagues of the potential consequences after members voted against her proposal.
'I hope none of our children die as a result,' she said.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Official investigation into Trump prosecutor Jack Smith launched
Official investigation into Trump prosecutor Jack Smith launched

New York Post

time10 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Official investigation into Trump prosecutor Jack Smith launched

The Office of Special Counsel has launched a formal investigation into Jack Smith, the first official legal probe into his conduct, The Post has learned. Smith is the justice department lawyer who oversaw two criminal investigations into President Donald Trump during the Biden administration, one into Trump's handling of classified documents, the other as to whether his actions on Jan. 6th, 2021 were an attempt to overturn the 2020 election. Both cases were dismissed. An email reviewed by The Post states The Hatch Act Unit, which enforces a law restricting government employees from engaging in political activities, has begun reviewing the former Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice. The email was written by Senior Counsel Charles Baldis at OSC. Advertisement 4 Jack Smith was appointed by President Biden's Attorney General Merrick Garland and resigned from his post as Special Council for the Department of Justice in January, after Trump assumed power. AP 'I appreciate the Office of Special Counsel taking this seriously and launching an investigation into Jack Smith's conduct. No one is above the law. 'Jack Smith's actions were clearly driven to hurt President Trump's election, and Smith should be held fully accountable,' said Senate Intelligence Committee chair Sen Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) in a statement to The Post. Advertisement OSC opened the investigation into Smith after Cotton wrote a letter earlier this week alleging Smith took blatantly political action to undermine President Trump in his 2024 bid. Smith, who was appointed by President Biden's Attorney General Merrick Garland, resigned from his post as Special Council for the Department of Justice in January, after Trump assumed power. 4 'Jack Smith's legal actions were nothing more than a tool for the Biden and Harris campaigns. This isn't just unethical, it is very likely illegal campaign activity from a public office,' Sen, Tin Cotton wrote. Getty Images 4 Under Jack Smith's watch the FBI raided Trump's home at Mar-a-Lago to search for documents. US Justice Department/AFP via Getty Images Advertisement Smith's actions as prosecutor have been widely criticized by Republicans who saw the prosecutions as an effort to weaponize the justice system against Trump and hobble his election chances in 2024. In his letter to OSC, Cotton explains how Smith's actions undermined Trump's political efforts. 'Jack Smith's legal actions were nothing more than a tool for the Biden and Harris campaigns. This isn't just unethical, it is very likely illegal campaign activity from a public office,' Cotton said. 'Many of Smith's legal actions seem to have no rationale except for an attempt to affect the 2024 election results – actions that would violate federal law.' Advertisement 4 Jack Smith investigated President Trump's handling of the 2020 election. REUTERS Cotton accuses Smith of blatant political actions to interfere with Trump's 2024 presidential run, including speeding up his investigation to schedule trial dates that would interfere with important political moments, such as the Iowa caucuses. 'These actions were not standard, necessary, or justified,' Cotton added. 'They were the actions of a political actor masquerading as a public official.' Smith has not publicly responded to Cotton's allegations. During his tenure, Smith maintained that his investigations followed legal protocols and were independent of political influence. Smith didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from The Post.

Nearly 5 years later, State Election Board calls on DOJ to help them get 2020 documents
Nearly 5 years later, State Election Board calls on DOJ to help them get 2020 documents

Yahoo

time33 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Nearly 5 years later, State Election Board calls on DOJ to help them get 2020 documents

Nearly five years after the 2020 presidential election, the Georgia State Elections Board has voted to request assistance from the Department of Justice in obtaining election-related documents from Fulton County. Despite multiple investigations at the federal, state and local levels finding no voter fraud in Georgia, the board remains persistent in its pursuit of documents, including voter lists and ballot impressions. 'We need to get to the bottom of it,' said Janelle King, a State Elections Board member who supported the resolution. Robb Pitts, Fulton County Commission Chair, said that while that election wasn't perfect, it was fair, and reiterated that every single investigation at every level showed that. RELATED STORIES: Georgia Supreme Court makes ruling on changes to elections Elections board member says she still believes rules were 'beneficial' despite Supreme Court ruling Georgia Republicans want to limit early voting sites to just 1 location per county in revised bill Georgia Secretary of State's Office to purge 455,000 registrations from voter rolls He said he's getting tired of those three board members continuing to come after Fulton County and refusing to let 2020 go. 'What these people are talking about, what they're after, the 2020 election is over with. They're done with. So, at some point, somebody's going to have to knock some sense into their heads. But it's just silliness at this point,' Pitts said. The State Elections Board's decision to seek documents from Fulton County comes despite previous findings that showed no voter fraud in the 2020 election. King emphasized the need for further investigation, calling on both the Secretary of State's Office and the Department of Justice for assistance. 'At the risk of being disinvited to the White House once again, that is pure nonsense,' Pitts said. The court case involving the election board subpoena for those documents is scheduled for September. Solve the daily Crossword

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store