HB 517 OC Bill passes last committee!

~*'Phoenix'*~ · Mar 24, 2011

So the best hope still is for 234 to hurry up out of the disgusting quagmire of a Judiciary committee, and Rules committee, so we can unify the bills and get them to both floors at once?

Or as long as they keep amending both to make them match, they remain unified at the end of 234's committees for the floors to vote on identical versions? to skip the whole double-committee waste of time?

The next bill I bother following with interest is the one that bans this stupid committee process.

77zach · Mar 24, 2011

~*'Phoenix'*~ said:
If it does, I'll be :cuss:ed if it goes to the same sickening committees 234 is stuck in. Rediculous, what do we pay these people for? How long does it possibly take to meet enough times to decide on a bill?

There is no reason, anywhere, why it should take 6 committees to decide on whether or not a bill is fit to be heard by the rest of the legislature.

You should see the garbage these people propose. For a libertarian, looking at all the bills is like going through a haunted house. Gridlock is good. It slows the tyranny down. On the other side, once a freedom is gone....You ain't gettin' it back.

nigmalg · Mar 24, 2011

77zach said:
You should see the garbage these people propose. For a libertarian, looking at all the bills is like going through a haunted house. Gridlock is good. It slows the tyranny down. On the other side, once a freedom is gone....You ain't gettin' it back.

It's crazy because as it stands, if both bills were brought up in either house they would be passed as-is. The bureaucratic committee process here stands a chance of actually killing a bill otherwise supported.

Rich7553 · Mar 24, 2011

maps761 said:
I was a RADAR tech at Tempelhof Zentralflughafen, Berlin, 3/73 - 3/75. 1946th Comm Squadron.
My Dad also has the Army of Occupation medal, but when he was in Berlin, everyone was living in the rubble. He was 82nd Airborne, 508 PIR.
I had more fun than he did.

Excellent! I was in logistics at the 690 ESW (former 6912 ESG) at Marienfelde from 1983 - 1990, and the wife worked in the 7350 ABG orderly room. My son was born at the US Army Hospital there.

~*'Phoenix'*~ · Mar 24, 2011

77zach said:
You should see the garbage these people propose. For a libertarian, looking at all the bills is like going through a haunted house. Gridlock is good. It slows the tyranny down. On the other side, once a freedom is gone....You ain't gettin' it back.

Fair enough I admit some beaurocracy may be a necessary evil, by wasting the tyrants' time with meaningless meetings and schedules, we keep them from spending their energy truly harming us.
But still I say, there's no way the government should allow 5 or 6 committees to decide what's fit for the full legislature to hear. Censorship and abuse of power, here we come...

Kingfish · Mar 24, 2011

~*'Phoenix'*~ said:
Fair enough I admit some beaurocracy may be a necessary evil, by wasting the tyrants' time with meaningless meetings and schedules, we keep them from spending their energy truly harming us.

Oh no. When they want to restrict rights, it can be done quick, fast and in a hurry. Look at what happened when OC was prohibited back in the 80s.

77zach · Mar 24, 2011

Kingfish said:
Oh no. When they want to restrict rights, it can be done quick, fast and in a hurry. Look at what happened when OC was prohibited back in the 80s.

True enough.

And it may be one rep keeping oklahoma going from red to gold. And it was one senator that kept colorado from going from brown to green (the good green).

skk123 · Mar 24, 2011

maps761 said:
Who was the idiot who said that "man with a gun" calls would result in a "priority 1" response with a minimum of two officers and they would "draw down" on the person with the gun?

If they do that, the resulting law suit will be a fun one to follow.

That would be Sheriff Jim Coats, sheriff of Pinellas county. Unfortunately this is a county I frequent on a regular basis. Maybe Floridians should meltdown his mailbox to let him know what a ridiculously asinine statement that was. Thankfully the sheriff is voted on bit I don't think any sheriff in Florida has the balls to go against the Florida sheriffs association.

Anyone who watched probably noticed when he was asked about RAS and basically said it didn't matter because someone called 911 and they'd still detain the person to find out if they're legally carrying.

nigmalg · Mar 24, 2011

skk123 said:
That would be Sheriff Jim Coats, sheriff of Pinellas county. Unfortunately this is a county I frequent on a regular basis. Maybe Floridians should meltdown his mailbox to let him know what a ridiculously asinine statement that was. Thankfully the sheriff is voted on bit I don't think any sheriff in Florida has the balls to go against the Florida sheriffs association.

Anyone who watched probably noticed when he was asked about RAS and basically said it didn't matter because someone called 911 and they'd still detain the person to find out if they're legally carrying.

Well he may be costing his department a lot of money in a lawsuit soon. It's unfortunately his irrational acts will end up costing innocent tax payers money.

77zach · Mar 24, 2011

Here is the *****'s email

http://www.pcsoweb.com/pages/SendMail.html

Here is my letter that will probably be auto-deleted.

Dear Sheriff Coats,

I was very displeased to watch the video of the House Judiciary committee on March 24th. In that meeting you unsuccessfully lobbied to keep our right to bear arms restricted. Any good American should not really care if open carry is negatively perceived by the law enforcement community because it is a natural right. However, the truth is that it is a non issue in the other 43 states that allow open carry. Indeed, roughly 30 states allow it virtually everywhere with NO PERMIT REQUIRED FOR THOSE 18 AND UP! You went off half cocked and did not even bother to consult LEOs in, say, Alabama- which recognizes the right without a permit. I myself have open carried on several occasions in other states. I was once ordering food at a chick-fil-a in North Carolina and in walked two state troopers. They saw my weapon and did not even give me a double take.

Please stop using your position to lobby against the rights of peaceful citizens.

rvrctyrngr · Mar 24, 2011

skk123 said:
That would be Sheriff Jim Coats, sheriff of Pinellas county. Unfortunately this is a county I frequent on a regular basis. Maybe Floridians should meltdown his mailbox to let him know what a ridiculously asinine statement that was. Thankfully the sheriff is voted on bit I don't think any sheriff in Florida has the balls to go against the Florida sheriffs association.

Anyone who watched probably noticed when he was asked about RAS and basically said it didn't matter because someone called 911 and they'd still detain the person to find out if they're legally carrying.

I wasn't able to watch the video (goofy format wouldn't stream to a Droid), but if he actually said that....Wow. A duly elected Constitutional official on tape saying he'd basically order his subordinates to ignore the edicts of settled law to push his opinion. Case law in Florida is very clear that the mere presence of a weapon in and of itself, without evidence of a crime or imminent crime is not RAS, let alone PC to detain a person, much less threaten them with deadly force.

Nice.

Guess if I ever OC in Pinellas county, I'll carry a 1911 AND wear body armor!

~*'Phoenix'*~ · Mar 24, 2011

So it looks like 234 is running slow in senate judiciary still. Their next meeting is the 28th, they seem to meet once a week, and it's not on their agenda for the next meeting. Does this really mean we can't expect even the 2nd senate committee to vote on it until the 4th of next month? Do we have any reason to believe the 3rd committee would be any quicker than that one?

77zach · Mar 24, 2011

rvrctyrngr said:
Case law in Florida is very clear that the mere presence of a weapon in and of itself, without evidence of a crime or imminent crime is not RAS, let alone PC to detain a person

What's the name of that case again?

nigmalg · Mar 25, 2011

I was told HB517 didn't make into onto the Special Order Calendar for next week. We shouldn't see HB517 get floor action until the beginning of April.

That gives us next week to find out why SB234 isn't being scheduled with the Judiciary. I plan on posting a lot of frowny faces if the Judiciary puts out another schedule without 234!

Kingfish · Mar 25, 2011

nigmalg said:
I was told HB517 didn't make into onto the Special Order Calendar for next week. We shouldn't see HB517 get floor action until the beginning of April.

That gives us next week to find out why SB234 isn't being scheduled with the Judiciary. I plan on posting a lot of frowny faces if the Judiciary puts out another schedule without 234!

Could they sneak it into the meeting or does it HAVE to be published. I can see them taking it up to just pass it quickly and quietly.

~*'Phoenix'*~ · Mar 25, 2011

Kingfish said:
Could they sneak it into the meeting or does it HAVE to be published. I can see them taking it up to just pass it quickly and quietly.

What? You could see someone in the government working quickly and stealthily to help us regain our freedoms???
I missed something there...
Sure would be nice though.
Pretty sure they have to have 2 days notice for any bill going into committee to give the anti's time to get there and spew their emotional whine.

77zach · Mar 25, 2011

They really pulled out all the stops in that last House Committee hearing. Senate judiciary will probably have every sheriff in the state speak against it. Why not? They get to use tax dollars to drive up and spend the night. I have a really bad feeling about it I can't shake.

Rod0990 · Mar 25, 2011

Kingfish said:
Oh no. When they want to restrict rights, it can be done quick, fast and in a hurry. Look at what happened when OC was prohibited back in the 80s.

You know it wouldnt surprise me at all if the Bill prohibiting OC was a swift one. I wonder how long it took for that to go into effect. Later today I may do a search to find out.

Do both HB 517 and SB 234 allow OC? I have to read up more on 517.

nigmalg · Mar 25, 2011

Rod0990 said:
You know it wouldnt surprise me at all if the Bill prohibiting OC was a swift one. I wonder how long it took for that to go into effect. Later today I may do a search to find out.

Do both HB 517 and SB 234 allow OC? I have to read up more on 517.

They both are almost identical. Theoretically, an amendment should be filed prior to the Judiciary meeting to bring it inline with HB517. This could avoid a conference committee at a later date.

The legislative process is not transparent enough. I've asked around about who does the scheduling and when, and everyone direct me to someone else. The bill could die in the Senate and we would still be discussing it like it had a chance, only to realize it when the Senate adjourns.

Who decides what bill is worthy of scheduling for a hearing?

~*'Phoenix'*~ · Mar 25, 2011

Rod0990 said:
You know it wouldnt surprise me at all if the Bill prohibiting OC was a swift one. I wonder how long it took for that to go into effect. Later today I may do a search to find out.

Do both HB 517 and SB 234 allow OC? I have to read up more on 517.

Both make provisions for:
Handgun OC by FL CWFL lisencees
Legal parking lot storage (anywhere?)
and Rifle/Shotgun personal sales/purchases from any state if meeting in person and meeting both states' laws

They were filed by allies who are amending as they go to keep them in line with one another, so once 234 finishes Judiciary and Rules committees, identical bills can hit the full legislature floors at the same time and get to the governor without having to go through double committee sequences, which is what would happen if there was only one or the other.

HB 517 OC Bill passes last committee!

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member