The Arizona Legislature’s two Second Amendment hawks achieved a major victory for their constituents’ freedoms.
Earlier this month, the Sedona City Council announced plans to reconstruct a local ordinance that had caught the ire of two Republican state legislators this fall, Representatives Quang Nguyen and Selina Bliss. The news came after the lawmakers had taken their dispute to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office over the City of Sedona’s Ordinance 12.30.090, which prohibits individuals from carrying firearms on “any trail or open space area.”
Nguyen had previously written, “The City of Sedona has had ample time to address these concerns and has chosen not to act. We are left with no choice but to seek the Attorney General’s involvement to ensure the rule of law is followed.”
The letter to Mayes followed Representative Nguyen’s prior communication to Sedona Mayor Scott Jablow and city councilmembers over the ordinance. Nguyen had highlighted that the Ordinance’s prohibition “on carrying firearms is not consistent with Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-3108,” thus making it “invalid and unenforceable because it exceeds what state law authorizes. He pointed out that “cities may…enact ordinances ‘[l]imiting or prohibiting the discharge of firearms in parks and preserves’ when certain statutory conditions are met.”
In a comment to another local publication, a City of Sedona spokeswoman said, “In the new ordinance, a person will be able to carry the firearm in the park but can’t discharge it unless in self-defense.” This ordinance is expected to be updated on December 10, at the next city council meeting.
Bliss responded to the announcement from the municipality, saying, “A message to cities and towns…don’t violate the rights of the people!”
Nguyen and Bliss, two seatmates in a Yavapai County legislative district, have quickly proven themselves to be some of the top Second Amendment advocates in the state. Over the past two years, both lawmakers have won the “Legislator of the Year” award from the Arizona Citizens Defense League for their protection of Second Amendment rights. They will look to continue their defense of Arizonans’ constitutional rights to keep and bear arms in the upcoming legislative session in yet another divided state government.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Two Arizona Republican lawmakers are escalating their defense of the Second Amendment in a dispute of a local ordinance.
On Monday, State Representatives Quang Nguyen and Selina Bliss announced that they had sent a letter to Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes over the City of Sedona’s Ordinance 12.30.090, which prohibits individuals from carrying firearms on “any trail or open space area.”
In a statement that accompanied the announcement, Nguyen said, “The City of Sedona has had ample time to address these concerns and has chosen not to act. We are left with no choice but to seek the Attorney General’s involvement to ensure the rule of law is followed.”
The letter to Mayes follows Representative Nguyen’s prior communication to Sedona Mayor Scott Jablow and city councilmembers over the ordinance. Nguyen had highlighted that the Ordinance’s prohibition “on carrying firearms is not consistent with Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-3108,” thus making it “invalid and unenforceable because it exceeds what state law authorizes. He pointed out that “cities may…enact ordinances ‘[l]imiting or prohibiting the discharge of firearms in parks and preserves’ when certain statutory conditions are met.”
The northern Arizona lawmaker requested that the city leaders “conduct a legal analysis of the validity of Ordinance 12.30.090 and contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss your findings and any next steps you intend to take to ensure that Ordinance 12.30.090 complies with state law.”
In their most recent communication over the issue, Representatives Nguyen and Bliss told the state’s attorney general that Sedona “has not responded to our letter and, to our knowledge, has not taken any actions to remedy the Ordinance’s legal flaws.” The lack of response or corrective action led the legislators to request that Mayes “review the question identified above and issue a written report within 30 days as required by [state law].” They added that if the Arizona Attorney General’s Office were to find a violation of state law, there should be a pursuit of special action in the state’s Supreme Court to resolve this matter.
Nguyen and Bliss, two seatmates in a Yavapai County legislative district, have quickly proven themselves to be some of the top Second Amendment advocates in the state. Over the past two years, both lawmakers have won the “Legislator of the Year” award from the Arizona Citizens Defense League for their protection of Second Amendment rights. They will look to continue their defense of Arizonans’ constitutional rights to keep and bear arms in the upcoming legislative session in yet another divided state government.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
A Republican state legislator is standing up for the Second Amendment in a municipal matter.
Last week, State Representative Quang Nguyen transmitted a letter to Sedona Mayor Scott Jablow. The letter, which was also sent to city councilmembers, addressed the validity of Ordinance 12.30.090, which states that “[i]t shall be unlawful to carry or discharge into any park, trail, or open space area firearms or projectile weapons… or other device capable of causing injury to persons or animals or damage or destruction to property.”
In a press release accompanying the announcement of his letter, Nguyen said, “I urge the City of Sedona to review Ordinance 12.30.090 to ensure it complies with Arizona law. It’s important that local ordinances do not infringe upon the constitutional rights of Arizonans or conflict with state statutes.”
In his letter, Representative Nguyen highlighted that the prohibition in Sedona’s Ordinance “on carrying firearms is not consistent with Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-3108,” thus making it “invalid and unenforceable because it exceeds what state law authorizes. He pointed out that “cities may…enact ordinances ‘[l]imiting or prohibiting the discharge of firearms in parks and preserves’ when certain statutory conditions are met.”
The northern Arizona lawmaker requested that the city leaders “conduct a legal analysis of the validity of Ordinance 12.30.090 and contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss your findings and any next steps you intend to take to ensure that Ordinance 12.30.090 complies with state law.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.