By Howard Fischer
Mail | X: @azcapmedia

PHOENIX — A House panel approved legislation Wednesday some lawmakers say could shield parents from liability when a child takes a gun from the house and kills someone else.

Rep. Quang Nguyen, R-Prescott Valley, said the purpose of his legislation is to close a loophole in state law that generally prohibit unaccompanied minors from carrying a firearm. There is an exception, however, if the minor is on the property of the parent, grandparent or guardian.

Where that becomes a problem, according to Rebecca Baker, a deputy Maricopa County attorney, is when the adults don’t want a child to have a gun. What that means, she said, is police called to the home are powerless to take the gun from the child.

“So it’s very problematic because it allows a juvenile to possess a firearm in circumstances where their parent or guardian doesn’t want them to do so,” Baker told members of the House Judiciary Committee. “It could be, and often is, that the parent or the guardian doesn’t want the child to have the gun and they want the police to take it.”

She said that’s a particular problem in group homes where current law says a child living there could bring in a weapon and possess it legally.

But Rep. Analise Ortiz, D-Phoenix, said the measure could have broader effects.

She cited the case in Michigan where Jennifer Crumbley was convicted earlier this month of four counts of involuntary manslaughter after a jury concluded she was “grossly negligent” in giving a son to her son, Ethan, who was 15 at the time and failing to get him mental health care. He later went out and killed four students and wounded six students and a teacher in 2021.

“So if a child commits a crime, the parent could just easily tell law enforcement, ‘No, I didn’t give them consent,’ even though they may have given them consent,” Ortiz said. “All they have to do is just lie to the police officer.”

House Minority Leader Lupe Conteras said that goes to another flaw in House Bill 2819: how parental consent is determined and verified. The Avondale Democrat said there is no requirement for a signed, dated consent form that shows a parent consented at a specific time to a child possessing a weapon in the home.

And Contreras said the fact a parent might have given a weapon to a child in the first place doesn’t resolve the issue of responsibility.

“We’re giving them a scapegoat by saying, ‘I didn’t give them consent, but, yet, I just purchased the firearm that they just used,’” he said. “We need to be careful of what we’re doing here and what we’re trying to pass.”

Baker said she doesn’t see the problem that Contreras said this would create.

“This language is not going to provide any sort of defense if someone’s shooting a gun,” she said.

“It only provides a defense to possessing the gun in a home,” Baker said. “The narrow interest of this bill is to try to tighten up that broad exception of any child can unequivocally possess a gun in the home.”

Contreras disagreed.

“We’re not tightening up the language,” he said. “This is loosening the language.”

And Ortiz, voting against the measure, called it “another half-baked bill.”

Rep. Alexander Kolodin, R-Scottsdale, said he’s not convinced parents will lie and tell police they didn’t consent to a child having a weapon.

“I’m not going to throw my kid under the bus,” he said.

“If anything, the parent is going to lie the other way and say, ‘I did give consent,’” Kolodin said, trying to protect a child from getting a felony record.

But he had some issues with the wording, including whether consent would be something a parent needed to grant just one time or whether it would have to occur multiple times. Then there’s the question of the need for state legislation in the first place.

“Why are we making a parental discipline issue into a criminal justice issue?” Kolodin asked. “Isn’t it up to the parent to enforce the rules of their own household?”

The measure, which now goes to the full House, also has the blessing of the Arizona Citizens Defense League, which generally lobbies against any legislation designed to restrict gun ownership.

“It supports parental rights,” said lobbyist Michael Infanzon. “And it supports the rights inside a home for parents to teach their kids responsible gun ownership.”