Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Florida Carry Legislative Alert - SB 234 Stuck and Gutted

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746

    Florida Carry Legislative Alert - SB 234 Stuck and Gutted

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – March 10, 2011

    SB 234 - FL Senate Committee on Criminal Justice hearing scheduled for 3/14/11

    As most of you know, SB 234’s two primary elements, open carry and campus carry, have been gutted by committee amendments.

    These amendments were proposed, accepted, and integrated into the bill without public comment or discussion. On February 22, 2011, the father of Ashley Cowie, the FSU student who was killed in an off-campus incident, presented an impassioned plea against the campus carry element of SB 234. Ashley was killed by a student who was too young to get a concealed weapons/firearms license (CWFL), allegedly was under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol, negligently mishandled a rifle too large to carry concealed for self-defense purposes, at an off-campus frat house at which weapons were prohibited.

    The campus carry initiative has nothing in common with this tragic event, and the current ban on lawfully carried firearms did not prevent it. In fact, there are 71 campuses in the U.S. where concealed carry is permitted, some of which have been doing so since 1995, and not a single gun-related event has occurred on any of those campuses.

    But the amendment to kill campus carry was passed by the committee without them hearing these facts because not a single proponent of campus carry was permitted to address them prior to the amendment’s adoption. No debate, no discussion was permitted. Ironically, after the amendment was adopted, a college law enforcement administrator wasted time allotted to public discussion to continue opposing the already dead element.

    Likewise, the open carry element was saddled with an amendment that demanded impractical and unnecessary requirements that no other open carry state in the union, including California, requires. The requirements are for firearm retention training, a level-2 retention holster, and public display of one’s license in proximity to a firearm being openly carried.

    The retention training requirement is not realistic for a number of reasons. First, no other open carry state has such a requirement since there is no evidence that there is any substantial threat to open carriers of being relieved of their firearms by criminals. It simply isn’t happening anywhere else. Law enforcement will maintain that their officers must undergo such training because of numerous incidents of fellow officers being killed by their own firearms. But they conveniently forget that these incidents result from the officer’s duty to initiate contact and apprehend nefarious types, often violent felons who have no desire to get sent to prison. No such duty exists with citizen open carriers, and there is little motivation for the felon to initiate contact with an armed citizen when so many unarmed potential targets exist.

    The requirement for a statutorily undefined level-2 retention holster again stems from this unsubstantiated and purely speculative assumption that an armed citizen is a ripe target for a criminal. Again, no other open carry state requires this because there is no evidence to support a threat. Indeed, if there was ever a candidate for mandatory wearing of a retention holster of any type, it would be for a law enforcement officer. There is no state requirement that police use a level-2 retention holster.

    Also, by requiring a citizen to only open carry in a retention holster does not address a very basic function of the open carry initiative; that being the ability switch from concealed carry to open carry at will depending on conditions. For example, a CWFL holder carrying in a standard in-waistband holster concealed under a light jacket would not be permitted to remove his jacket.

    Furthermore, level-2 retention holsters are not available for many popular makes and models of side-arms. Many gun owners will not be able to open carry their side-arm because no manufacturer has marketed their holster as a "level-2".

    Finally, the requirement to display one’s CWFL in public would again, only exist in Florida. Law enforcement has universally discouraged CWFL holders from the use of badges, as this could cause the public to mistake them for officers. There is no reason to believe that the mandatory display of licenses would not be likewise mistaken for police identification.

    The Supreme Court of Florida has ruled that the mere possession of a firearm does not suffice as reasonable suspicion for the purpose of detention, identification, and search of citizens, yet this requirement sidesteps the concept of reasonable suspicion/probable cause and in fact, authorizes police to question law-abiding citizens under the guise of “verifying” carry credentials.

    Florida statutes do not require CWFL holders to identify themselves to law enforcement for this very reason. It is also quite ironic that in light of this committee’s passage of SB 604, the bill which permanently exempts CWFL licensee data from release under so-called “sunshine laws”, the public display of a licensee’s name, and on some licenses their home address, for all to see.

    The true purpose behind this amendment is clear. Having no real substantiated reason to deny open carry, certain groups and individuals instead are attempting to make the practice so burdensome as to either discourage the vast majority of CWFL holders to participate in open carry, or to make the open carry initiative itself so unpalatable to proponents that it would soon die due to lack of interest.

    And again, as with the arguments for campus carry, these facts were not permitted to be presented to the committee prior to adoption of the amendment requiring these unrealistic requirements. Through two entire sessions of the committee, the SB 234 supporters were afforded a single, 30-second time slot by a single individual, and this occurred AFTER the amendments were approved by the committee. This is intolerable and surely flies in the face of the concept of representing the people.

    We ask members and non-members alike to e-mail, write, and call the Senate President Mike Haridopolos, and express your outrage over the actions of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee.

    There is ample documented evidence to support SB 234, and nothing but unsubstantiated opinion against it. Procedurally, it is a travesty that amendments are adopted without public discourse, which has a direct bearing on said amendments.

    We urgently need you to email Senator Haridopolos NOW!

    Include “Please help us get SB 234 through committee” in the Subject Line

    E-mail Helper (feel free to cut, paste, and edit to suit)

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    TO:
    haridopolos.mike.web@flsenate.gov

    SUBJECT:
    Please help us get SB 234 through committee!

    Dear Senator Haridopolos,

    This e-mail is to express my outrage as to the procedural conduct of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee with regards to the gutting of Senate Bill 234 without the benefit of public discourse.

    An ill-conceived amendment to the proposed open carry legalization was passed by the committee without a single word from the public prior to its adoption. Each and every element of the amendment can be factually argued, but no argument was permitted whatsoever.

    Despite two committee meetings addressing the bill, which still has not yet been voted upon, the supporters of SB 234 have been permitted a single individual to speak for a total of 30 seconds. Florida Open Carry Movement members from across the state were gagged in the audience without the opportunity to speak. This is a travesty, and only supports the notion that the committee is not interested in hearing arguments in favor of the bill for which they have no rebuttal.

    We request your assistance in getting a SB 234 through committee and to the Senate floor where both sides will have the opportunity to present verifiable and documented facts, without the procedural maneuvering that is clearly picking apart this good bill.

    Respectfully yours,

    <Your Name>
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  2. #2
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Sent.

  3. #3
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    When I call I will mention that only a government employee and anti's were allowed to speak, and that AFTER the amendment was submitted WITHOUT debate or warning. This is the key IMO. How is this proper procedurally?

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    You KNOW I sent it. I can't compose civilized paragraphs of my own ATM.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    florida
    Posts
    39
    Also sent

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    148
    Sent my own version. I kept it respectful but pointed, as I hope everyone else does.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    St augustine
    Posts
    19
    Sent !!!

  8. #8
    Regular Member Walt_Kowalski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Ashburn, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    355
    sent
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"
    -- George Washington

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567

    Angry

    Quote Originally Posted by ixtow View Post
    You KNOW I sent it. I can't compose civilized paragraphs of my own ATM.
    Oh man, neither can I. Very rarely do I feel such anger in my heart. I am not pissed. I'm angry. Damn it, I serve in the ARMED FORCES, but if I decided to go to college I better not be ARMED or I'm instantly a criminal. GTFO. You can carry a Beretta 92 on your hip so you can easily get to it to kill people in the defense of your government, BUT DON'T YOU DARE TRY TO CARRY IT ON YOUR HIP TO DEFEND YOUR FAMILY. I'm just so mad right now.
    Last edited by Schlitz; 03-10-2011 at 06:09 PM. Reason: TO ADD THE ANGRY FACE. FUUUUUUUUUUUU

  10. #10
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Called Evers office. I was told Open carry will be restored to its original wording, now that the sheriffs asscociation has said they will oppose EVEN THE NEW REQUIREMENTS, requirements that they would have accepted originally. So they went back on their word.

    Now, on Monday we get to watch old Charlie Dean, Sheriff Association spokesperson and enemy of the people, kill open carry in the state of Florida or do the right thing and support us.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by 77zach View Post
    Called Evers office. I was told Open carry will be restored to its original wording, now that the sheriffs asscociation has said they will oppose EVEN THE NEW REQUIREMENTS, requirements that they would have accepted originally. So they went back on their word.

    Now, on Monday we get to watch old Charlie Dean, Sheriff Association spokesperson and enemy of the people, kill open carry in the state of Florida or do the right thing and support us.
    We need to skip the CJ committee. Based on what I've witnessed, there is no way Dean will vote against the Sheriff Association. I'm assuming the Senate President has the power to put this in front of the full senate?

    When is Evers going to file this reversal amendment?

  12. #12
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by nigmalg View Post
    We need to skip the CJ committee. Based on what I've witnessed, there is no way Dean will vote against the Sheriff Association. I'm assuming the Senate President has the power to put this in front of the full senate?

    When is Evers going to file this reversal amendment?
    I called Haridopolis. Spoke to Bonnie about the impropriety in the CJ committee. I did not think to ask that specific question, I just asked if he could "look into it and do anything about it". She said she would "pass it along".

  13. #13
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005

    Florida Sheriff's Association

    http://www.flsheriffs.org/legislativ...lative_agenda/

    Go to the bottom of the page and RESPECTFULLY plead ( I know, I know) our case to the gentlemen listed. Not giving up on other alternatives, but it can't hurt.

    http://www.flsheriffs.org/legislativ...lative_agenda/

    and the head of the serpent, steve casey
    http://www.flsheriffs.org/about_us/s..._organization/

    Title the email "Open Carry, SB 234, and Senator Charlie Dean"

    Tell them we want to be their friends, if they would just respect our rights. Just like in 43 other states. Tell them we know that we are not their slaves. Quote the front page of OCDO. The quotes from LEO's around the country regarding Open Carry. Tell them there is nothing to be afraid of. Tell them to call off their dog, charlie. In a pleading and respectful tone.

    Snowball's chance in hell, but we're in big trouble anyway.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Jupiter, FL
    Posts
    1
    E-mail sent to Haridopolis

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Sorry man, I just can't. If I call someone on the phone I know I'll just start cussing and screaming.

    We don't need that.

    Dockery wasn't going to approve anyway. The names are just a smokescreen for the real power behind it, doing the bidding of the cops without having to get their names in it. If you want to keep fighting this, it will be an ugly uphill battle that will end in disappointment.

    Don't take that as a suggestion not to do it. I take on impossible causes that I know I will lose simply because it's the right thing to do. But I need to take a breather, I've already gotten several calls from private numbers today and a few drive-bys of familiar vehicles...
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  16. #16
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by ixtow View Post
    Sorry man, I just can't. If I call someone on the phone I know I'll just start cussing and screaming.

    We don't need that.

    Dockery wasn't going to approve anyway. The names are just a smokescreen for the real power behind it, doing the bidding of the cops without having to get their names in it. If you want to keep fighting this, it will be an ugly uphill battle that will end in disappointment.

    Don't take that as a suggestion not to do it. I take on impossible causes that I know I will lose simply because it's the right thing to do. But I need to take a breather, I've already gotten several calls from private numbers today and a few drive-bys of familiar vehicles...
    I couldn't resist calling Dean's office. Spoke to Kevin, legislative assistant. It was the hardest thing to do, but I only acted curious. I was extremely polite, calm and collected even though my pulse was elevated. I believe Kevin was trying to deceive me. He tried to defend his master, but in the end he stealthily led me to the conclusion we all knew to be true. I thanked him for his time and said good night.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    30
    According to the amendment, The class is not "required"

    (c) Carrying openly requires the carrier to have
    50 demonstrated competence with a firearm and firearm retention as
    51 provided in paragraph (2)(h).


    According to 2.h.6


    "6. Is licensed or has been licensed to carry a firearm in
    76 this state or a county or municipality of this state, unless
    77 such license has been revoked for cause;"


    so simply having a CCW (A "License" in the state of FL) is said to completed that requirement correct?




    For the record, the only part of the amendment I dislike is the having to display ID. I personally do not care about college carry, but more so Open Carry. My carry holster is a Level 2 (Blackhawk SERPA) and According to their own documentation, I have completed their requirements..



    I also like this that was added


    It shall not be a violation
    13 of this section for a person who is licensed to carry a
    14 concealed firearm, and who is lawfully carrying it in a
    15 concealed manner, to accidentally or inadvertently display the
    16 firearm to the ordinary sight of another person so long as the
    17 firearm is not displayed in a rude, angry, or threatening
    18 manner.
    Last edited by WwRGSwW; 03-10-2011 at 08:58 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by WwRGSwW View Post
    For the record, the only part of the amendment I dislike is the having to display ID. I personally do not care about college carry, but more so Open Carry. My carry holster is a Level 2 (Blackhawk SERPA) and According to their own documentation, I have completed their requirements..
    And if there is no holster MARKETED as a "Level 2" for the firearm your neighbor, brother or daughter carries? Do they need to go buy a new firearm or just not carry?

  19. #19
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by Kingfish View Post
    And if there is no holster MARKETED as a "Level 2" for the firearm your neighbor, brother or daughter carries? Do they need to go buy a new firearm or just not carry?
    These bad amendments will be withdrawn, but it doesn't matter now. If the senate president doesn't intervene we can't get it past senator Dean in the CJ committee. Our side doesn't even get to talk at the public hearings. Unless you wear a state issued uniform or are agitating for a new law restricting a liberty that is not yet restricted, you don't get any air time. And if you don't like it, you don't care about our heroes, the people in this world who make the grass grow green, our "laaawwwrrrrr ennfarrcement offficarrrss".
    Last edited by 77zach; 03-11-2011 at 11:19 AM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Miami, Florida, United States
    Posts
    74

    Article about committee meeting in Todays Miami Herald


  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    148
    There was an amendment to the amendment filed by Evers:

    http://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0234

    " Delete lines 6 - 93"
    Does this wipe out the previous amendment(s) retention and ID requirements?
    Last edited by nigmalg; 03-11-2011 at 02:03 PM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by nigmalg View Post
    There was an amendment to the amendment filed by Evers:

    http://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0234

    " Delete lines 6 - 93"
    Does this wipe out the previous amendment(s) retention and ID requirements?
    yes

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by 77zach View Post
    yes
    Thank goodness it's not a complete disaster. Now it's time to ask Dean and Dockery officially, if it has their support.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Kingfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia, USA
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by nigmalg View Post
    There was an amendment to the amendment filed by Evers:

    http://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0234

    " Delete lines 6 - 93"
    Does this wipe out the previous amendment(s) retention and ID requirements?
    Yes it does. It puts OC back the way it was.

  25. #25
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by nigmalg View Post
    Thank goodness it's not a complete disaster. Now it's time to ask Dean and Dockery officially, if it has their support.
    Dockery killed public school carry to appease that idiot Thrasher. Dean makes or breaks it.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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