-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Examiner.com - SB 234 promises to bring big changes to FL gun laws
- Thread starter Rich7553
- Start date
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
I don't understand how adding OC to the list of Privileges of the only-ones fixes the supposed constitutional issue that a Right Cannot be taxed.
It's green, not yellow.
I don't expect that notion will have much traction in a place where being a special appointee of the State is so cherished and flaunted.
It's green, not yellow.
I don't expect that notion will have much traction in a place where being a special appointee of the State is so cherished and flaunted.
Gray Peterson
Founder's Club Member - Moderator
It's called pushing as far as we can legislatively and then finding someone who can't afford to pay the fees and then sue in court.
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
It's an interesting premise that I usually subscribe to myself. But with a supermajority all around, why the walking on eggshells?
Unlicensed OC wasn't taken away gradually anyhow... It was there one day, and gone the next.
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
I can't afford the fees. I also know it would stand in court, which costs more than the fees....
Gray Peterson
Founder's Club Member - Moderator
wait, you own a handgun, and your shoot presumably, and you can't afford $117?
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
What a Liberal-esque shifting of the discussion...
Does it really matter if it can be afforded? The point is that if you have to pay for it, beg for permission, be registered as a dangerous gun carrier, lose other rights, etc... Clearly, it isn't a RIGHT anymore.
OC may be entirely non-existent at this time, but with a super-majority, why are we 'fighting' to throw it (and every Floridian) under the bus?
Tactically, CC sucks. But lawfully, CC sucks even more. This is a weak and destructive path to take, when we have no reason to take it. Choosing to sacrifice OC without even trying only makes sense to elitists who want to keep the act of Bearing Arms as a privilege no matter the type of carry.
Stepping over dollars to pick up dimes while having the position and ability to simply pick up the dollars....
Gray Peterson
Founder's Club Member - Moderator
I'm asking you a serious question.
OC isn't a right. Carry by itself is the right. Also:
"dangerous gun carrier"
*checks his license*
It says "Concealed Weapon or Firearm License". You don't need to own a gun to have a carry license, I could carry a knife if I wanted to. Now, if the carry license itself listed the guns on the permit, I'd say it is gun registration. It isn't.
"lose other rights"
What rights are those?
Just because they have an R next to their name, doesn't mean they support unlicensed OC by itself. Politicians slippery and slimy bastards, as you well know.
OC was already gone in 1987 when the media decided to go on the warpath against OC by finding the a "scary black man" with an openly carried handgun and plastering it all over the papers and the TV news. They were already causing a massive amount of hysteria with the recently passed concealed carry law and the preemption statute (the preemption statute was what wiped away all local general carry/OC bans), so the Legislature passed FL Statute 790.053. You can't walk out on the street and open carry just to open carry now.
Am I arguing that licensed OC is right or constitutional? No. My preference is constitutional carry, where you can OC or CC without license. I am, however, not going to call for the defeat of licensed OC out of a test of purity.
When both the shall-issue carry law and the OC ban passed (OC ban passed in a called emergency session to deal with this exact issue, by Governor Martinez, a guy with an R next to his name, remember that), there was only one effective restriction against carry:
FLORIDA: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and of the lawful authority of the state shall not be infringed, except that the manner of bearing arms may be regulated by law." Fla. Const. art. I, S 8
The 11th Circuit, the federal circuit court of appeal with jurisdiction over Florida, Georgia, and Alabama, ruled 2A to be a collective right, and definitely not applicable to the states in any case. These case rulings are now dead letter due to Heller and McDonald.
Florida gets licensed OC, while slightly disappointing, won't stop the march towards constitutional carry so that one doesn't need to pay a fee or get a license. That is my end goal. Is it yours? Since my parents are still there, I don't want them to pay a fee for a right, either.
-Gray, raised in Florida thirteen years.
Last edited:
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
I gave you a serious response.
If you have to ask permission, it isn't a Right.
If you have to pay for it, it Isn't a Right.
If YOU are registered (via the license), it isn't a Right.
If you have to surrender other Rights to do it, it isn't a Right.
If you have to hide it, it isn't a Right.
That last one is the only part that will change.
Agreed.
A Right cannot be taxed.
A Right cannot require you to give up other Rights.
A Right does not require permission.
Stop right there. the fact that you had to beg and prove your innocence to get it, covers all the bases.
I never said it was Gun registration. It's PERSON registration with a specific cause in mind. It isn't much different from being a Registered Jew, or a Registered Sex Offender. Registering PEOPLE as 'known weapon possessors' is a dangerous re-branding of the same historical events. Intent be damned; it does what it does, and it is what it is. The intent changes with every election, so that can't be a consideration in law and government.
It creates an 'unenforcible' circumstance to Carriers.
No Sterile Carry.
No Right to Remain Silent (Hiibel excepted, also, the FL Loitering Statute's stop and identify clause outlining RAS for the Court's Findings in Hiibel).
No protections of any kind under the 4th or 5th Amendment.
While, technically, these will still exist, asserting them as a citizen will become impossible. Our 4th Amendment Rights will become unenforcible.
Entirely agreed; which is why they shouldn't have the control that a privilege gives them, a Right is much harder for them to abuse.
I know, I was there.
I understand this, I'm taking exception the blind eye being turned to the domination tendencies that FL Politics has. There is pseudo-freedom here, so long as you submit to a boot on your neck in advance. Virtually every aspect of living in FL is tainted by a permanent strangle hold, all they have to do is squeeze. There is absolutely no way to live here without putting your head in the noose over average, everyday activities and hoping that the gov is feeling charitable enough not to pull the lever. My statement and belief is that if you're going to take OC back, you better do it right or it'll end up being turned into a curse. These bastards will find a way, just like they did with the seatbelt law.
Precisely.
The 11th Circuit? Really? Do they even know the SCOTUS exists?
Precisely; why Licensing OC will be creating an additional barrier, not a stepping stone to Constitutional Carry.
The State's Constitution claims the authority to make a Privilege of it. The 11th will uphold this on the 'reasonable regulation' premise that the SCOTUS groundlessly legislated.
Born here, never left. WAAAAYY more than 13 years..... ;-)
Gray Peterson
Founder's Club Member - Moderator
No, you're giving responses that are based in purely rhetorical analogies and not the current state of constitutional law. What you want to happen is likely going to require at least two trips to SCOTUS to further define (the right to carry in general, and then the right to be free of fees and licensing in order to exercise a right).
I have a really serious question for you: Are you telling me that you've forgone carrying on your person for your entire life, or at least since the Janet Reno bill was passed back in 1987? Somehow I have a difficult time believing this.
Farmer v. Higgins was pre-Heller and pre-McDonald case litigated to the 11th Circuit in 1987. Only the 5th and DC circuits pre-Heller ruled it to be an individual right before Heller came down and change everything.
Yes, because being restricted to carrying openly while going fishing is so much better than having an opportunity to carry on the street, to make for a further push to go constitutional carry in the mean time a couple of years down the line.
You have no idea how the 11th Circuit will rule on a case challenging the fees and licensing on carry, at all. They could rule positively, or they could rule against us, forcing us to go to SCOTUS.
Last edited:
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
I disagree with your analysis of my response. Were it not worth saying, I wouldn't have said it.
And this is going to happen in my lifetime? And the SCOTUS is going to actually have the desired finding? they already scribbled in the 'reasonable restriction' bit to suit themselves....
1) My life is not yet over, to the dismay of many.
2) I used to have a CWP, I let it expire.
I do not contest the technicality of it. I contest the practicality. There is no ACTUAL change.
No you're making rhetorical arguments, and basing the future of OC in FL upon it. It flies in the face of history to suggest that once seized, OC will then be freed.
True enough. But I do have an educated guess and a track record to look upon.
I merely suggest to strike while the iron is hot.
Gray Peterson
Founder's Club Member - Moderator
I still think it's rhetorical statements
I don't know how old you are. If you're 80 years old I'd have a doubt, but you need to look at the history of the civil rights movement of the 1940's to 1960's for inspiration:
Please look up Charles Hamilton Houston, and the work he did to set up the fall of segregation. The only reason his work took nearly thirty years to do is due to lining up plaintiffs, and gaining knowledge of cases. The age of information technology will make the the 2A Civil Rights Movement work tremendously faster.
That's really unfortunate. You see, apparently unlike you, I have a family members (a spouse) that rely on my continued ability to breathe and/or functionally working. Temporarily complying with an unconstitutional law while working to tearing through strategic civil rights litigation and legislative progress is a cost of being able to protect myself and my loved ones.
I'm sure a criminal will understand that you were apparently unwilling to "subject yourself to the state" and take mercy on you if you ever happen to travel outside of your home or your vehicle.
You keep viewing it as purely a matter of rights. I also view it as a responsibility as well, to protect myself and my love ones. The responsibility is more important than purity of the right.
You can only open carry while fishing now, and if this bill passes, you can still continue to open carry while fishing if you don't have a carry license.
Only becomes you're only seeing the history of Florida. I have lived in several states in the nearly 30 years of my life. I have seen in the last several years significant progress we were able to make in the legislative and now legal arena during my adulthood, and I'm looking forward to the ability to carry nationwide either by court decision or via Congressional legislation (see my case and the Thune Amendment).
What track record? The problem is that a lot of gun rights activists can't see what's happening beyond the borders of their state to see the progress our rights have made in the legislative arena.
We have 40 shall-issue states now, with 3 of them allowing even concealed carry without a license (VT, AK, AZ). We'll likely get 5 more "constitutional carry" states next year, including Wisconsin (which will go from banned concealed carry to no permit required). We have over half a dozen carry related federal cases working their way through the federal court systems (or about to be filed) to take on the states which will never legislatively pass carry reform of any kind (CA, NJ, NY, CO, MD, MA, RI, IL), and once those happen, then we'll take on fees. Once fees are taken care of, the states won't license because it would be too expensive for them (busted budgets, anyone?).
I mean, look for yourself.
You're not merely suggesting. You're whining, like my little cousins used to whine if they didn't get the toy they wanted for Christmas. A majority of Legislators in the Florida Legislature didn't promise you unlicensed OC. Someone in Tallahassee likely did a vote count and there wasn't the votes for unlicensed open carry. StogieC can pipe up with particulars if he wants to.
Last edited:
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
I couldn't agree more.
More important than that, the exercise of inalienable Rights as they support said responsibility. If you are stripped of the Right to be responsible, what choice have you but to suckle from the State's teats if you want to live? Legislated Liberalism. But I digress...
I'm pointing out a significant flaw in the plan.
Not because I am a whiner, but because I want it to succeed and am rightly concerned that it very well may not. Why did I donate to FLOC? Becasue I'm a troll that wants to undermine it?
I am not limited to my State's Borders. I am concerned with the details of this State's Law that make it different from others. Ignoring those stumbling blocks does not make them go away.
I have long wished for a rational conversation with someone in the southeast, and was enjoying our productive discord until now... It's just another disingenuous wiener measuring contest at this point.
[sigh]
Last edited: