Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 40

Thread: On the Gov's desk.

  1. #1
    Regular Member RRobaldo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Lutz, FL
    Posts
    61

    On the Gov's desk.

    SB-234 is now on Gov. Scott's desk. It should be law or vetoed within the next few days if he works as quickly as he has with other bills.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    I have a feeling this was the plan from the beginning. Now anyone who CCs, weather they accidentally expose or not, but are known to the LEO to have a CWFL, can now be arrested, prosecuted, and incarcerated based solely on false testimony of a corrupt cop.

    I'm inclined to mail my CWFL back and stop carrying altogether. It's just too dangerous now.
    "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.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by ixtow View Post
    I'm inclined to mail my CWFL back and stop carrying altogether. It's just too dangerous now.
    Oh stop it.

  4. #4
    Regular Member ~*'Phoenix'*~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    If I had to guess, I would say its going to get a veto.
    I wish, but I seriously doubt it. Gov. Scott's conservative and pro-gun, but he hasn't struck me as the sharpest tool in the shed. I doubt he'll see the problems and unconstitutionality of this
    American Government 101:
    The Executive branch's job is to provide celebrity figureheads for the pandering populace.
    The Legislative branch's job is to progressively destroy our freedoms for the "safety" of "We the Sheeple."
    The Judicial branch's job is to look like they're defending our freedoms against the abuses of the Legislative branch, only by token gestures that do not interfere is this pivotal process, but enough to deceive "We the People" into a false sense of security.

  5. #5
    Regular Member ~*'Phoenix'*~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    538
    I guess I will, but he hasn't vetoed ANYTHING yet... except for most of the budget of course
    Last edited by ~*'Phoenix'*~; 06-08-2011 at 02:58 PM.
    American Government 101:
    The Executive branch's job is to provide celebrity figureheads for the pandering populace.
    The Legislative branch's job is to progressively destroy our freedoms for the "safety" of "We the Sheeple."
    The Judicial branch's job is to look like they're defending our freedoms against the abuses of the Legislative branch, only by token gestures that do not interfere is this pivotal process, but enough to deceive "We the People" into a false sense of security.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Viera, Florida, USA
    Posts
    73
    Can't he sign it and modify it? like add the open carry back into it?
    No.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The Swamp
    Posts
    76

    I just sent this

    Gov Scott,

    As a natural born Floridian, and a firearm enthusiast I am implore you to VETO SB-234. This bill is drastically different than what was originally penned at the beginning of the legislative process. The Florida State Senate managed to mangle this bill into such a mess that it could actually do more harm than good for those citizens who choose to carry a firearm concealed.

    I beg you to send this bill back to the House and Senate and tell them to give us a bill that restores the right for Florida’s citizens to openly carry a firearm.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    fl
    Posts
    1,835
    Wow,that's almost creepy. Nearly word-for-word what I sent him-but with the additional mention that some of us are working to put some new faces in that senate to deal with as a result of that clusterf--k

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    e-mail address please?

  10. #10
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
    e-mail address please?
    http://www.flgov.com/contact-gov-scott/
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  11. #11
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Wow, reading the disingenuous email from the NRA alerts might give people giving it a cursory read the impression that this is an open carry bill. Why are they calling this an open carry bill when it's a do nothing bill?

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=6886
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  12. #12
    Regular Member ~*'Phoenix'*~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    538
    I wrote too, asking him to urge the senate to pass legislation to truly restore our rights and not just sweep us under the rug like 234 would do if passed.

    "... we already took care of that last year..."
    American Government 101:
    The Executive branch's job is to provide celebrity figureheads for the pandering populace.
    The Legislative branch's job is to progressively destroy our freedoms for the "safety" of "We the Sheeple."
    The Judicial branch's job is to look like they're defending our freedoms against the abuses of the Legislative branch, only by token gestures that do not interfere is this pivotal process, but enough to deceive "We the People" into a false sense of security.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris
    Well guys I just wanted to stop by and say, bye... I dont think I will be posting on here till next year...
    ^ a while ago
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    Well guys, read SB234 and read it carefully. It says "brifely and openly display under certain circumstances" what are the circumstances besides the wind blowing lol!!
    ^now
    ?

    Anywho, I thought the final version that is going to his desk says this:

    "It
    34 is not a violation of this section for a person licensed to
    35 carry a concealed firearm as provided in s. 790.06(1), and who
    36 is lawfully carrying a firearm in a concealed manner, to briefly
    37 and openly display the firearm to the ordinary sight of another
    38 person, unless the firearm is intentionally displayed in an
    39 angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense."

    Can anyone clarify?

  14. #14
    Regular Member ~*'Phoenix'*~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    538
    I'm gonna interpret it as, when I'm not near lots of people, I'll "openly and briefly" display my "concealed firearm." Woods, park, maybe even, say, a redneck flea market where everyone is buying selling and wandering around with shotguns on their shoulders anyway? When someone complains, or an officer arrives? "Oh, sorry, I didn't know it was showing that much."
    American Government 101:
    The Executive branch's job is to provide celebrity figureheads for the pandering populace.
    The Legislative branch's job is to progressively destroy our freedoms for the "safety" of "We the Sheeple."
    The Judicial branch's job is to look like they're defending our freedoms against the abuses of the Legislative branch, only by token gestures that do not interfere is this pivotal process, but enough to deceive "We the People" into a false sense of security.

  15. #15
    Regular Member ~*'Phoenix'*~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    make sure you have a paper with all the laws in your walet just in case you have a officer that is trying to make a scene.
    Yeah, I would as backup... I'm not one who's willing to make too much of a scene to tests the limits though...

    Did I just read a LEO support my suggestion to try out the "Brief"-OC-and-see-what-happens?
    American Government 101:
    The Executive branch's job is to provide celebrity figureheads for the pandering populace.
    The Legislative branch's job is to progressively destroy our freedoms for the "safety" of "We the Sheeple."
    The Judicial branch's job is to look like they're defending our freedoms against the abuses of the Legislative branch, only by token gestures that do not interfere is this pivotal process, but enough to deceive "We the People" into a false sense of security.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member Jojo712's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by ~*'Phoenix'*~ View Post
    I'm gonna interpret it as, when I'm not near lots of people, I'll "openly and briefly" display my "concealed firearm." Woods, park, maybe even, say, a redneck flea market where everyone is buying selling and wandering around with shotguns on their shoulders anyway? When someone complains, or an officer arrives? "Oh, sorry, I didn't know it was showing that much."
    Brilliance. Completely defensible under this vague new law. Believe me folks, although it may cause arrests, acquittals will be very easy to come by until the entire law gets quashed by the DCA.

    Example 2: @ihop with friends and you want to show them the new sight on your 1911. You pull it out, show it, and take it back into the holster. Brief, not angry, and the entire show may have taken 15 seconds. No clip, no round in the chamber: violation or not?

    Let the fight begin about this vague language. This little law may usher in a good year for criminal lawyers.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member Jojo712's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    Email Scott ask him to Veto it
    A step is a step Mach1chris. Let's let the fight continue with a tiny bit more freedom on the citizen's side, and a little more confusion for those in your profession (and mine, thankfully).

  18. #18
    Regular Member 77zach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Marion County, FL
    Posts
    3,005
    Briefly.

    I can't believe they're putting this language into statute. Pushing the law is generally considered poor form and counterproductive. But when your rights are grossly violated and the law is this vague and stupid it begs to be willfully tested. When they come after us we can then say, 'see NRA, it didn't work, now lets go for the real thing.' Briefly can mean anything to anyone. If all LEOs were pro rights like us, the new language could be interpreted as allowing OC everywhere all the time, because our opinions could assign a value of hours to "briefly." If there are 24 hours in a day and I'm in a store for 15 minutes OCing, I'm in the store for a brief part of the day.
    “If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? ” -Bastiat

    I don't "need" to openly carry a handgun or own an "assault weapon" any more than Rosa Parks needed a seat on the bus.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by 77zach View Post
    Briefly.

    Briefly can mean anything to anyone. If all LEOs were pro rights like us, the new language could be interpreted as allowing OC everywhere all the time, because our opinions could assign a value of hours to "briefly." If there are 24 hours in a day and I'm in a store for 15 minutes OCing, I'm in the store for a brief part of the day.
    That is a good point you make, do you thing there is a loophole here in our favor?
    Last edited by 10x; 06-08-2011 at 11:48 PM.

  20. #20
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    Well guys, read SB234 and read it carefully. It says "brifely and openly display under certain circumstances" what are the circumstances besides the wind blowing lol!!
    Perhaps the hot air involved in the statute itself? Hell, that much hot air could keep my firearm exposed at all times... So it's all their fault! :-p
    "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.

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by mach1chris View Post
    officer that is trying to make a scene.
    Does this mean an officer can arrive on his own scene?

    "I arrived at my tantrum at approximately X:XXnn, I observed the subject making me feel like my penis was not big enough. I approached the subject from behind and..."
    Last edited by ixtow; 06-09-2011 at 02:46 AM.
    "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.

  22. #22
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    I think the meat of this:


    "It
    34 is not a violation of this section for a person licensed to
    35 carry a concealed firearm as provided in s. 790.06(1), and who
    36 is lawfully carrying a firearm in a concealed manner, to briefly
    37 and openly display the firearm to the ordinary sight of another
    38 person, unless the firearm is intentionally displayed in an
    39 angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense."



    is the following portion:

    "unless the firearm is intentionally displayed in an angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense."


    the whole reason i carry my gun is for necessary self defense. i don't carry it in an angry or threatening manner. therefore, if i "OC" my gun in florida, i am carrying per this statute- "necessary self-defense".

    It puts no limit or definition on the term "brief". it only puts a limit or definition on the MANNER of how it is "briefly and openly" displayed to the sight of an ordinary person: "angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense."


    I would say that since there is no LIMIT or DEFINITION on the word "brief" in the statute, that if this went to court, the only thing that would be prosecutable would be the final part: "angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense." if the person arrested for OC did not display it in an "angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense", then i would have to say the case would be dismissed. but i'm not a lawyer. i'm just a citizen of florida who is interpreting a statute.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    doubt is a distraction from reality. fear is acknowledging doubt as reality.

    it's time to tap in to a higher reality; the one you were made for.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    I think the meat of this:


    "It
    34 is not a violation of this section for a person licensed to
    35 carry a concealed firearm as provided in s. 790.06(1), and who
    36 is lawfully carrying a firearm in a concealed manner, to briefly
    37 and openly display the firearm to the ordinary sight of another
    38 person, unless the firearm is intentionally displayed in an
    39 angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense."



    is the following portion:

    "unless the firearm is intentionally displayed in an angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense."


    the whole reason i carry my gun is for necessary self defense. i don't carry it in an angry or threatening manner. therefore, if i "OC" my gun in florida, i am carrying per this statute- "necessary self-defense".

    It puts no limit or definition on the term "brief". it only puts a limit or definition on the MANNER of how it is "briefly and openly" displayed to the sight of an ordinary person: "angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense."


    I would say that since there is no LIMIT or DEFINITION on the word "brief" in the statute, that if this went to court, the only thing that would be prosecutable would be the final part: "angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense." if the person arrested for OC did not display it in an "angry or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense", then i would have to say the case would be dismissed. but i'm not a lawyer. i'm just a citizen of florida who is interpreting a statute.
    Those are my thoughts on this too, Zach made a good point about is briefly 15 minutes of going shopping as long as I am not carrying in a threatening or angry manner?

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran Schlitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,567
    Now that we've come to this conclusion.... Why wouldn't they just pass licensed open carry

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    148
    If pushed, the first test case will have the "brief" language deemed unconstitutionally vague.

    Typically the court will strike down a strict interpretation while allowing the loose interpretation to stand, i.e., reversal or acquittal. This is how our legal system works. A court will never remove the entire language as passed by the legislature, they will simply set a precedent that Open Carry is technically nonpunishable.

    And funny enough, this is exactly the path that was going to be taken had the legislature flubbed on open carry. If the court rips the penalties out of 790 for OC, we have de facto open carry. The legislature will have to meet to specifically ban it.

    It's my theory anyway.
    Last edited by nigmalg; 06-09-2011 at 09:14 AM.

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
  •