Two new bills filed in the Alabama House of Representatives by State Rep. Ernie Yarbrough (R-Trinity) would bolster the state's self-defense provisions and place a statewide ban on enforcing so-called red flag laws.
Yarbrough's bills deal with a similar theme: Alabamians' Second Amendment rights. Yarbrough has already filed legislation to give citizens a "2nd Amendment Sales Tax Holiday," exempting all firearms, ammunition, and hunting accessories from sales taxes.
SEE: State Rep. Yarbrough proposes '2A sales tax holiday' for gun-related purchases
"It seems like, a lot of sessions, there's a flood of either bad gun legislation or legislation that's concerning because it could lead to Second Amendment violations," Yarbrough said. "It feels like, in Alabama, we should be a state that should have bills that are pro-gun, celebrating this right that we as Americans love and enjoy and want to pass on to our children. Not only for hunting but also because having a well-armed citizenry is vital to the defense of our country. So the purpose here was I wanted to provide not only legislation that Alabama loves and that resonates with our core values but legislation that people who are big on the Second Amendment actually could get behind and be happy about."
The two bills are House Bill 408 (HB408) and House Bill 409 (HB409), both of which have several co-sponsors, including House Majority Leader Scott Stadthagen (R-Hartselle) and House Majority Whip Brock Colvin (R-Albertville).
HB408, also known as the Stand Your Ground Innocence Act, would provide that a person is immune from criminal prosecution or civil action for using justified physical force for self-defense unless the individual against whom force was used was a law enforcement officer carrying out an official duty.
It would also shift the burden of proof to the state by requiring a showing of clear and convincing evidence that the defendant's use of force was unreasonable. Currently, the burden of proof lies on the person claiming self-defense.
Yarbrough referenced the nationally known story of Kyle Rittenhouse in explaining his bill. Rittenhouse was placed on trial for murder after shooting three people who attempted to assault him in 2020, two of which were fatal. Rittenhouse was found not guilty, but not after a lengthy trial and a massive smearing from the mainstream media.
"The concept here is preventing a situation where a courtroom or court proceedings could be militarily authorized to financially ruin someone," Yarbrough told 1819 News. So, what that bill does is, if you use the stand your ground to protect yourself, your family, or whatever, and you have to use violent force, instead of it going to trial right away, there's a pre-trial hearing. The judge would have to look at the case and the facts, and there has to be clear and convincing evidence that excessive and unreasonable force was used for it to even proceed to a trial. Otherwise, it's dismissed. It's kind of like a Kyle Rittenhouse situation where he would never have had to have gone through all of that only to be exonerated."
HB409, also known as the Anti-Red Flag Gun Seizure Act, would prevent the implementation of so-called red flag laws. Red flag laws refer to any provisions that allow a citizen's firearms to be forcibly confiscated without a hearing or having committed a disqualifying crime.
HB409 defines a red flag law as "Any federal, state, or local statute, law, regulation, ordinance, directive, rule, executive order, or judicial order or finding that prohibits a resident of this state from owning, possessing, transporting, transferring, or receiving a firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition; or that directs or requires the temporary or permanent seizure, removal, confiscation, or surrender of a firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition from a citizen of this state."
The legislation purposefully does not include existing state laws that allow firearms confiscation for criminal convictions or after a court hearing.
Agencies that violate the bill's provisions could be subject to a $50,000 fine.
"This bill has been passed in multiple states," Yarbrough continued. "Very simply, we don't want a judge to be able to step in, apart from the already existing process in Alabama, where you have somebody has to be declared to be unfit. There's a process for that. So, we don't want our guns temporarily seized if we are arbitrarily deemed as a danger to ourselves without due process and without the following existing walls that help regulate that. It's just protecting our Second Amendment rights so that people are not targeted or unduly persecuted for political or other reasons. Our rights are there for a reason, and they need to be defended.
To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email [email protected].
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
