Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Hb 89

  1. #1
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005

    Hb 89

    http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/0089

    Bill seeks to make defensive display legal. There will be much crying and gnashing of teeth over this common sense legislation. From the same people who have no problem with one of the state's costumed enforcers pointing guns at people even when there is no threat. After all, they're "trained". Like the NYPD, for example.

    The bill would also legalizes open carry, but won't be interpreted to allow it. If it became law, it would make the OC ban that much more ludicrous.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  2. #2
    Regular Member conandan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    248
    I don't think it will make it to the governors desk, but would be nice if it did. One step closer to getting oc in Florida.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by 77zach View Post
    http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2014/0089

    Bill seeks to make defensive display legal. There will be much crying and gnashing of teeth over this common sense legislation. From the same people who have no problem with one of the state's costumed enforcers pointing guns at people even when there is no threat. After all, they're "trained". Like the NYPD, for example.

    The bill would also legalizes open carry, but won't be interpreted to allow it. If it became law, it would make the OC ban that much more ludicrous.
    It was a horrible bill when it was first introduced, and it is still a horrible bill.

    Warning shots? Please!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,156
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    It was a horrible bill when it was first introduced, and it is still a horrible bill. Warning shots? Please!
    It did make interesting reading. What happens when the positive purpose of the defensive display warning shot results in the negative outcome of a fatality? Do warning air-shots in Florida, and these air-shots are identical with celebratory air-shots, NOT invariably result in an anonymous fatality?
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    I think it's a great bill. If you shoot someone in self defense, you are responsible to know what is behind and beyond your target. If you choose to fire warning shots, then that is your right if faced with an imminent threat. If you damage property or hurt an innocent person when firing those warning shots, then you should be responsible and make restitution accordingly.

    Regardless, if it can be passed without the warning shot language, then it would still be good. Cops can point guns at us for any reason at all, in practice.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Rich7553's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SWFL
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    It was a horrible bill when it was first introduced, and it is still a horrible bill.

    Warning shots? Please!
    The bill neither authorizes nor encourages warning shots. It simply decriminalizes them. If an attack can be deterred by displaying a firearm, why should that be punished as an aggravated assault? If it takes a warning shot, why should that incur a mandatory minimum 20 years? The only alternative is to wound or kill the attacker. Why is that preferable?
    Rich
    MSgt, USAF Ret.
    Executive Director
    Florida Carry, Inc.
    www.floridacarry.org
    Glock 23 RTF2
    Mosin Nagant M91/30 (1942 Izhevsk)
    _____________________________________
    Want to do something about your gun rights?
    PITCH IN, QUIT B*TCHING!

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich7553 View Post
    The bill neither authorizes nor encourages warning shots. It simply decriminalizes them. If an attack can be deterred by displaying a firearm, why should that be punished as an aggravated assault? If it takes a warning shot, why should that incur a mandatory minimum 20 years? The only alternative is to wound or kill the attacker. Why is that preferable?
    If the use of deadly force is 'authorized' by 776 then the discharge of a firearm is lawful. Or am I missing something?

    Also, the display of a firearm is legal if the situation warrants it.

    Just because some SA's overcharge (and judges allow it to happen) does not mean we need to change the law. Just like the anti's want to do with 'Stand your Ground'.

    This bill attempts to codify existing case law, but does so poorly. It will not stop any arrests or prosecutions in questionable circumstances.

    The only idea I can get behind is the repeal of minimum mandatory sentencing provisions.

  8. #8
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    If the use of deadly force is 'authorized' by 776 then the discharge of a firearm is lawful. Or am I missing something?

    Also, the display of a firearm is legal if the situation warrants it.

    Just because some SA's overcharge (and judges allow it to happen) does not mean we need to change the law. Just like the anti's want to do with 'Stand your Ground'.

    This bill attempts to codify existing case law, but does so poorly. It will not stop any arrests or prosecutions in questionable circumstances.

    The only idea I can get behind is the repeal of minimum mandatory sentencing provisions.

    as i understand current law, you can't simply pull your gun in self defense...you have to use it against the attacker....
    Last edited by hammer6; 10-05-2013 at 01:10 PM. Reason: emphasis

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    as i understand current law, you can't simply pull your gun in self defense...you have to use it against the attacker....
    You are completely mistaken in your understanding.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Rich7553's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SWFL
    Posts
    516
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    If the use of deadly force is 'authorized' by 776 then the discharge of a firearm is lawful. Or am I missing something?

    Also, the display of a firearm is legal if the situation warrants it.

    Just because some SA's overcharge (and judges allow it to happen) does not mean we need to change the law. Just like the anti's want to do with 'Stand your Ground'.

    This bill attempts to codify existing case law, but does so poorly. It will not stop any arrests or prosecutions in questionable circumstances.

    The only idea I can get behind is the repeal of minimum mandatory sentencing provisions.
    There are many cases of a defender being charged with aggravated assault simply for drawing a firearm against an attacker.
    Rich
    MSgt, USAF Ret.
    Executive Director
    Florida Carry, Inc.
    www.floridacarry.org
    Glock 23 RTF2
    Mosin Nagant M91/30 (1942 Izhevsk)
    _____________________________________
    Want to do something about your gun rights?
    PITCH IN, QUIT B*TCHING!

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich7553 View Post
    There are many cases of a defender being charged with aggravated assault simply for drawing a firearm against an attacker.
    And nothing in this bill will prevent those despicable, freedom hating, conviction hungry, SA's from continuing to do so.

  12. #12
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich7553 View Post
    There are many cases of a defender being charged with aggravated assault simply for drawing a firearm against an attacker.

    that's what i was getting at.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •