The Open Carry and Strict Scrutiny bill has been filed

Raventai said:

On first read I thought his quote was to say the bank robber would take out the open carrier, after reading again that could be a veiled threat that Pinellas Co sheriff officer would shoot law abiding citizens. Chilling,


I grew up in st. Pete, it was a lovely place, I recently returned, 2011/12, the place has changed in many ways, the police state is in full effect.

Click to expand...

There is another thread where this was discussed.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...E-group-opposes-OC&highlight=Pinellas+sheriff

Raventai said:

I read it as the FPCA thinks this bill has a chance (good) and they want to meddle with the language in exchange for thier support (bad)


Thier first ammendment baring threatening with a firearm seams reasonable enough

Thier second and third weaken the 4th amendment protections in this bill, if police behave and are truly investigating when needed not a big deal, but it opens us up to abuse and harassment from certain municipalities that have an anti-gun agenda.


The fourth requires a holster, while I would never carry without a holster I am not sure I want to be required to carry in a holster.


Is thier support worth the cost? Can we get the bill we want without them?

Click to expand...

Good points. I'd say yes to their support being worth the cost. Get legal OC on the books. Once people realize the sky isn't falling we can work on the other stuff.

district9 said:

Good points. I'd say yes to their support being worth the cost. Get legal OC on the books. Once people realize the sky isn't falling we can work on the other stuff.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, move the ball as far down the field as we can in this play.

I'm just wondering what is going to make the judiciary chair hear this bill. I'm also wondering about the Rules chair too. You know, the guy who wanted a special permit issued on a discretionary basis for those wanting to carry guns onto university campuses.

77zach said:

I'm just wondering what is going to make the judiciary chair hear this bill. I'm also wondering about the Rules chair too. You know, the guy who wanted a special permit issued on a discretionary basis for those wanting to carry guns onto university campuses.

Click to expand...

Nothing, I assume, just like every other time the chair killed our gun bills. As politicians are a monkey see/monkey do lot, since California stripped the right to carry on campus from its licensees I doubt we will be able to sustain a campus carry bill.

Raventai said:

I read it as the FPCA thinks this bill has a chance (good) and they want to meddle with the language in exchange for thier support (bad)


Thier first ammendment baring threatening with a firearm seams reasonable enough

Thier second and third weaken the 4th amendment protections in this bill, if police behave and are truly investigating when needed not a big deal, but it opens us up to abuse and harassment from certain municipalities that have an anti-gun agenda.


The fourth requires a holster, while I would never carry without a holster I am not sure I want to be required to carry in a holster.


Is thier support worth the cost? Can we get the bill we want without them?

Click to expand...

Thier first ammendment baring threatening with a firearm seams reasonable enough

Click to expand...

That's already unlawful. 790.10

The fourth requires a holster

Click to expand...

CAMEL, NOSE, TENT.
They better define 'holster' very, very carefully - but they won't.

Senate break down of open carry

This is worth about as much as you paid for it. But, I have a few minutes of downtime. We will assume (maybe a big assumption) that the House will pass the OC bill. Here is where I see the support in the senate. Yes votes are from previous yes votes in 2011 or this session or verbal or written confirmation. The senate was the problem in 2011.

Abruzzo- Yes
Altman-Yes
Bean- ?
Benacquisto- Yes
Bradley-Yes
Brandes-Yes
Branyon-No
Bullard-No
Clemens-No
Dean-No
Detert-?
Diaz de la Portilla-No
Evers-Yes
Flores-Yes
Gaetz-Yes
Galvano-?
Garcia-Yes
Gardiner-?
Gibson-No
Grimsley-No
Hays-Yes
Hukill-?
Hutson-?
Joyner-No
Latvala-No
Lee-?
Legg-?
Margolis-No
Montford-No
Neg ron-Yes
Richter-Yes
Ring-No
Sachs-No
Simmons-Yes
Simpson-?
Smith-No
Sobel-No
Soto-Yes
Stargel-?
Thompson-No

13 yes, 14 no and 12 ?'s. Now, all of the ?'s are Republican and more will be Yes than No. Therefore, this legislation would survive a floor vote IF it gets voted on there in unmolested form. As we know, there is no way to gauge the quality of the support. The support must be of high quality to make the Judiciary chair (Portilla-No) hear the bill. It must be high to vote down poison pill amendments. Also, I suspect that senate President Gardiner, isn't a huge fan. There is only so much political capital. The NRA really wants to fix the FLSC's crapping on the SYG law and they want campus carry. This isn't their priority, though it should be.

Edit: Grimsley from ? to No

initialisms

77zach said:

This is worth about as much as you paid for it. But, I have a few minutes of downtime. We will assume (maybe a big assumption) that the House will pass the OC bill. Here is where I see the support in the senate. Yes votes are from previous yes votes in 2011 or this session or verbal or written confirmation. The senate was the problem in 2011.

Abruzzo- Yes
Altman-Yes
Bean- ?
Benacquisto- Yes
Bradley-Yes
Brandes-Yes
Branyon-No
Bullard-No
Clemens-No
Dean-No
Detert-?
Diaz de la Portilla-No
Evers-Yes
Flores-Yes
Gaetz-Yes
Galvano-?
Garcia-Yes
Gardiner-?
Gibson-No
Grimsley-?
Hays-Yes
Hukill-?
Hutson-?
Joyner-No
Latvala-No
Lee-?
Legg-?
Margolis-No
Montford-No
Neg ron-Yes
Richter-Yes
Ring-No
Sachs-No
Simmons-Yes
Simpson-?
Smith-No
Sobel-No
Soto-Yes
Stargel-?
Thompson-No

14 yes, 13 no and 13 ?'s. Now, all of the ?'s are Republican and more will be Yes than No. Therefore, this legislation would survive a floor vote IF it gets voted on there in unmolested form. As we know, there is no way to gauge the quality of the support. The support must be of high quality to make the Judiciary chair (Portilla-No) hear the bill. It must be high to vote down poison pill amendments. Also, I suspect that senate President Gardiner, isn't a huge fan. There is only so much political capital. The NRA really wants to fix the FLSC's crapping on the SYG law and they want campus carry. This isn't their priority, though it should be.

Click to expand...

I appreciate the excruciating detail with which you are following this issue.
I am trying to stay with it as well, but keep getting stopped by the flurry of initialisms used.
Can you explain SYG,

efriday said:

I appreciate the excruciating detail with which you are following this issue.
I am trying to stay with it as well, but keep getting stopped by the flurry of initialisms used.
Can you explain SYG,

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure he is using the media-hyped frequently misnamed/misapplied/completely inaccurate description for the "Stand Your Ground" provisions contained in chapter 776. Heck even some Florida courts call it SYG instead of the proper description: "Justifiable Use of Force".

notalawyer said:

I'm pretty sure he is using the media-hyped frequently misnamed/misapplied/completely inaccurate description for the "Stand Your Ground" provisions contained in chapter 776. Heck even some Florida courts call it SYG instead of the proper description: "Justifiable Use of Force".

Click to expand...

JUF......:lol:

efriday said:

I appreciate the excruciating detail with which you are following this issue.
I am trying to stay with it as well, but keep getting stopped by the flurry of initialisms used.
Can you explain SYG,

Click to expand...

Lawyer is correct, SYG is the natural and common law right of self defense that had to be specifically protected in Florida's Justifiable use of force law. A few Overzealous prosecutors decided they didn't want the tax cows defending themselves. The anti gun media calls it "stand your ground" or the "shoot first" law. They are liars.

I put changed Grimsley from ? to No in post 107

http://www.highlandstoday.com/hi/lo...-allow-openly-carrying-guns-in-2016-20151230/

Glad I'm not making the list this time. Though, I think it's futile since Portilla is never going to let it come up.

ixtow said:

Glad I'm not making the list this time. Though, I think it's futile since Portilla is never going to let it come up.

Click to expand...

Yeah he won't do it without being forced and Gardiner won't push it so I'd be surprised.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

DLP getting some exposure on TTAG.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...-key-to-floridas-open-and-campus-carry-bills/

A few thoughts.

OC is much more important than campus carry.
"They" will never allow open carry in schools, even though they should.
There is no reason to oppose concealed carry on campus
Most states don't criminalize campus carry, they let schools expel students for carrying. This would be an acceptable first step and compromise IMO if it would pass. Later, we can shove it down their throats.

The open carry bill for privilege card holders (House Version) will be heard in the House Judiciary committee Thursday.

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2016/0163/?Tab=BillText

amendment filed by Representative Kerner

The following amendment has been filed by Representative Kerner, negating all progress toward Open Carry in Florida proposed by Representative Gaetz.

CS/CS/HB 163 (2016) Weapons and Firearms
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2016/0163
Filed to this Bill:
736117 - Strike All Amendment filed by Representative Gaetz
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2016/0163/Amendment/736117/PDF
354865 - Substitute Amendment (736117) filed by Representative Kerner
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2016/0163/Amendment/354865/PDF

I have sent an email to Representative Gaetz's office informing him.

The bill passed its final committee stop in the House. The ignorance, lying, mental illness, statism, totalitarian attitudes and philosophies, is very frightening and I'm really freaked out. The Republicans were pathetic, the Democrats need to be rounded up and placed on a remote island surrounded by genetically engineered Mako sharks like they had in "Deep Blue Sea". These people are immature and CRAZY. We'll see if it can get a hearing and survive poison amendments by Latvala and the Democrats in the Senate.

poison amendment killed

Actually, Rep Gaetz's office just replied with this message -

"Thank you for your email. The Rep. is currently presenting this bill before the Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Kerner’s substitute amendment was voted on just moments ago. Thankfully, it did not pass. Thank you for your support."

efriday said:

Actually, Rep Gaetz's office just replied with this message -

"Thank you for your email. The Rep. is currently presenting this bill before the Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Kerner’s substitute amendment was voted on just moments ago. Thankfully, it did not pass. Thank you for your support."

Click to expand...

Wow! I just got finished trying to digest the amendments and your office was all over it before I was finished.

Nicely done and appreciated!

AD