Will do Monday. The bill looks good to me, except for the sporting event restriction. That one always has bugged me.
- Licensed Open Carry
- Department of Agriculture may take Fingerprints for CWFL Application
- Licensed College Campus Carry
- Vehicle Carry and Storage Legal for Licensees
- Firearms (handguns & long guns) Purchase Legal in All States
Please call your State Senator and ask them to co-sponsor SB-234!
Will do Monday. The bill looks good to me, except for the sporting event restriction. That one always has bugged me.
Good to see Florida trying moving in the right direction, slowly but surely.
I WILL be SHOCKED if Florida ACTUALLY 'pulls-the-Trigger' on Open Carry.
Florida NEEDS to 'give-the-Finger' to Uber-Liberals and Yankee Transplants who are Messing Florida up!
We have conservative super-majorities in the state Senate and House. The Governor-elect has already promised to sign a repeal of Florida's Open Carry ban. We have a good chance of this going through but nay-saying from gun owners is counterproductive. Everyone needs to publicly and loudly get behind these bills by calling on their state Rep and Senator to support.
“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
It would be Nice if The Florida Legislature Authorized Open Carry in Florida.
It's still only Green... It's a paid-for revocable privilege at best. We already have that.
Even if this bill passes and gets signed; you'll still have to leave the State to Exercise A Right.
Is it better than what we've got? No, it's worse.
OC is being added to the restricted list. Once it gets there, it'll never be free. Instant detainment by asking to see the permit, etc...
This is a mixed bag at best.
We already have a paid-for, begged-for, revocable privilege. This takes OC and binds it into that same contract with the only-ones. It isn't creating anything. It's seizing and granting OC to the few special appointees of the State. It is as beneficial as the NFA.
I think those pressing it have good intentions. But the outcome will be nothing more than a visible version of what we already have; No Right to Bear Arms, and treated like a sex offender if you qualify for the privilege.
It's still New Jersey with Palm Trees.
If we have these super majorities, why is the 'pragmatic' approach being taken? Why not Gold OC?
Because, in FL, guns are exclusively for the elite appointees of the State. That reality is being guarded, no Citizen will ever dare infringe on the powers and privileges of the State.
Last edited by ixtow; 12-16-2010 at 12:01 AM.
Our rights were taken one at a time. We will get them back one at a time. This is a step in the right direction.
I don't know about you, but I don't want my only OC self defense option to be limited to fishing and hunting. Forward progress is forward progress, and I believe constitutional carry is the next step after this (along with eliminating places off-limits).
Yes, because like sex offenders, we are regularly posted on the internet as dangerous offenders.I think those pressing it have good intentions. But the outcome will be nothing more than a visible version of what we already have; No Right to Bear Arms, and treated like a sex offender if you qualify for the privilege.
There are tens of thousands of people in New Jersey who would love to be able to carry weapons in their state, and they can't because of a corrupted judicial system in that state. The fact that you're comparing a state which is shall-issue, with not even a suitability clause, to a state like New Jersey, diminishes the seriousness of the problem in New Jersey for the Americans trapped there.It's still New Jersey with Palm Trees.
You make good points which I'm glad to see someone address without being a dick.
What will happen to the unlicensed exceptions when/if it turns green?
While OC may be banned, we have a supermajority! Why do it halfway when we can do it Right?
.....unless, of course, the true objective is to relegate OC to the same only-ones state appointee realm as CC.
That's like someone offering you $1,000,000 tax-free for nothing, and you just take one dollar.
Yes, it's still better than nothing. But when the world is within your grasp, why intentionally fall short? ...unless, of course, you're not actually fighting for a right, but the power to retain regulation of a privilege.
It's the same attitude as NJ, hence, the comparison is valid; the attitude is my reference.
Last edited by Gray Peterson; 12-17-2010 at 04:21 PM.
In the entire history of Florida's Statehood, can you cite one instance of Florida setting back freedom it has wrested?
The NFA grew in it's restriction, not decreased. This will do the same. I may not have a Crystal Ball, but the examples of History show an overwhelmingly one-sided trend. I feel like I'm the only one who learns from it instead of repeating the same mistakes over and over expecting a different result....
Florida's court system and statutory law made "duty to retreat" the law of self defense in the state, putting a lot of innocent people in prison for "not retreating enough" from the confrontation. There were a lot of horrific examples of the "duty to retreat" being used by criminals to inflict further harm on victims who tried to turn around and run. That died in 2005 with the passage of the stand your ground law.In the entire history of Florida's Statehood, can you cite one instance of Florida setting back freedom it has wrested?
You didn't have a recognized individual right to keep and bear arms until 2 years ago with Heller, and you didn't have said right apply to the states until 6 months ago with McDonald. You realize that the NFA was only declared constitutional because the criminal's lawyer to argue in front of the court never showed up to make his case that an SBS was protected by the 2A, right? We also getting take back that right until we get it where they can't ban guns because they look like "scary machine guns".The NFA grew in it's restriction, not decreased. This will do the same. I may not have a Crystal Ball, but the examples of History show an overwhelmingly one-sided trend. I feel like I'm the only one who learns from it instead of repeating the same mistakes over and over expecting a different result....
Even this bill eliminates some of the criminal protection zones, and I believe another bill is being introduced to eliminate most of the rest of them (narrowing them to courthouses, detention facilities, secure government access facilities).
Then we can go for constitutional carry, where a person can carry concealed or open without a need for a license, but one can choose to get one for travel purposes.
Last edited by Gray Peterson; 12-18-2010 at 10:38 AM.
'except that the manner....by law'
The last two words of the State's 2A. Any old law they made up at a later date. It is a way to amend the State Constitution without actually having to amend the State Constitution. A loophole for the Government to entirely abridge the 2A if they so choose.
Cant wait for Florida to go to OC. Im from there and plan on moving back sometime in the future. Michigan is a OC state you dont need a license here. If anyone would like to see that OC here with what we call a CPL you can go to Michigan State Police legal update #86 maybe you could use that as a stepping block also. It states i as a CPL holder and OC can legally go into a PFZ ecept court houses,federal bldgs,casinos. But am exempt from others for an example i cant conceal in a school but as a parent i can legally OC with my CPL in a school. I will let you read it for clarification. I would like to meet other OC ers i will be in Zephyrhills and Lakeland around 2/17/2011 to 2/24/2011 ty hope this helps.
.......Originally Posted by HB 243
.......Originally Posted by HB 234
Last edited by ixtow; 01-02-2011 at 09:28 PM.
Hmm... ixtow I am glad you pointed out the fact that you have to produce ID and permit upon request by an officer when you are carrying concealed. I was planning on declining politely before I learned that. Could of gotten me in some trouble had I not known that.ixtow
.......Quote Originally Posted by HB 243:
The licensee must carry the license,
44 together with valid identification, at all times in which the
45 licensee is in actual possession of a concealed weapon or
46 firearm and must display both the license and proper
47 identification upon demand by a law enforcement officer"
From what I understand, the statute states that you must carry the permit and produce ID and show the permit upon demand ONLY when you carry concealed. You do not have to carry or produce any ID or permit upon demand by LEO if you are not carrying a concealed weapon on you.
The question now is: Are you still bound by law to produce the permit when you are open carrying? It can be argued that you do not have to show LEOs the permit or identification at all since the weapon is in plain view and there is no weapon concealment. Unless you are open carrying while fishing, hunting, or conducting shooting activites, it would be understood that you are a holder of a CWP. Even with the understanding, I believe that you would be in the right and the LEO would be in the wrong if they detain and demand ID just for the action of open carrying since the new bill states nothing about producing a CWP while open carrying.
In the end, I think it is a step in the right direction of getting rights back. A small step is better than no step I believe. I can only hope that it will not end at that step and we keep on moving until we have the ability to open carry with no licenses or classes in all the states.
Last edited by Peter t; 01-03-2011 at 07:59 AM.
Section 3. Subsection (1) of section 790.065, Florida
99 Statutes, is amended to read:
100 790.065 Sale and delivery of firearms.—
101 (1)(a) A licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or
102 licensed dealer may not sell or deliver from her or his
103 inventory at her or his licensed premises any firearm to another
104 person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer,
105 licensed dealer, or licensed collector, until she or he has:
106 1.(a) Obtained a completed form from the potential buyer or
107 transferee, which form shall have been promulgated by the
108 Department of Law Enforcement and provided by the licensed
109 importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, which shall
110 include the name, date of birth, gender, race, and social
111 security number or other identification number of such potential
112 buyer or transferee and has inspected proper identification
113 including an identification containing a photograph of the
114 potential buyer or transferee.
115 2.(b) Collected a fee from the potential buyer for
116 processing the criminal history check of the potential buyer.
117 The fee shall be established by the Department of Law
118 Enforcement and may not exceed $8 per transaction. The
119 Department of Law Enforcement may reduce, or suspend collection
120 of, the fee to reflect payment received from the Federal
121 Government applied to the cost of maintaining the criminal
122 history check system established by this section as a means of
123 facilitating or supplementing the National Instant Criminal
124 Background Check System. The Department of Law Enforcement
125 shall, by rule, establish procedures for the fees to be
126 transmitted by the licensee to the Department of Law
127 Enforcement. All such fees shall be deposited into the
128 Department of Law Enforcement Operating Trust Fund, but shall be
129 segregated from all other funds deposited into such trust fund
130 and must be accounted for separately. Such segregated funds must
131 not be used for any purpose other than the operation of the
132 criminal history checks required by this section. The Department
133 of Law Enforcement, each year prior to February 1, shall make a
134 full accounting of all receipts and expenditures of such funds
135 to the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of
136 Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of each house
137 of the Legislature, and the chairs of the appropriations
138 committees of each house of the Legislature. In the event that
139 the cumulative amount of funds collected exceeds the cumulative
140 amount of expenditures by more than $2.5 million, excess funds
141 may be used for the purpose of purchasing soft body armor for
142 law enforcement officers.
143 3.(c) Requested, by means of a toll-free telephone call,
144 the Department of Law Enforcement to conduct a check of the
145 information as reported and reflected in the Florida Crime
146 Information Center and National Crime Information Center systems
147 as of the date of the request.
148 4.(d) Received a unique approval number for that inquiry
149 from the Department of Law Enforcement, and recorded the date
150 and such number on the consent form.
151 (b) However, if the person purchasing, or receiving
152 delivery of, the firearm is a holder of a valid concealed
153 weapons or firearms license pursuant to the provisions of s.
154 790.06 or holds an active certification from the Criminal
155 Justice Standards and Training Commission as a “law enforcement
156 officer,” a “correctional officer,” or a “correctional probation
157 officer” as defined in s. 943.10(1), (2), (3), (6), (7), (8), or
158 (9), the provisions of this subsection does do not apply.
159 (c) This section does not apply to the purchase, trade, or
160 transfer of firearms by a resident of this state when the
161 resident makes such purchase, trade, or transfer in another
162 state, in which case the laws and regulations of that state and
163 the United States governing the purchase, trade, or transfer of
164 firearms shall apply. A National Instant Criminal Background
165 Check System check shall be performed prior to such purchase,
166 trade, or transfer of firearms by a resident of this state.
167 Section 4. This act shall take effect July 1, 2011.
790.065 regulates DEALER sale of firearms. NICS is not available to anyone but authorized individuals, such as law enforcement agencies and firearms dealers. Private individuals do not have access to NICS. what is is also saying is that when a resident of Florida goes to another state to buy a firearm in that state, that resident only has to comply with the laws of that state, not Florida's law, but they must be NICS checked. That's all. There is no elimination of private sales here.
Last edited by Gray Peterson; 01-03-2011 at 07:53 AM.
If all sales require NICS, and only dealers can use NICS, poof.
This is FL; give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile. And get away with it.
Maybe you rich guys can afford to fight this in court when it happens, but not everyone can.
I used to be against the bill, but have changed my mind and think it's a step in the right direction. This is really a pivot point to Constitutional Carry. There is the danger that this will solidify the sheeples' notion that carry is a privilege. They're going to see hostile thugs in black uniforms-sorry, "heroes", demanding people Ocing produce their papers. Then again, gun control is falling out of favor nationwide-and once OC is old news here, then we can go for the whole enchilada: either gold star status then constitutional carry or just right to constitutional carry. Even though the country is going to hell in a handbasket-it seems more and more people are waking up to the importance of the RKABA, so I think it more likely licensed OC will grease the skids to unlicensed open and concealed carry. There is a reason the antigun groups are terrified of OC-it "norms" society to the notion that guns are just tools that people have a right to have.
I had to go to New Jersey recently, and I researched their gun laws. Let me tell you, Florida is not NJ with palm trees. NJ is a gun owner's hell. It's hard to believe that a state in this union can be so tyrannical. Just know that NJ and North Korea have similar gun laws.