• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

The NEW SB234: A statutory weapon against CCers

ixtow

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Messages
5,038
Location
Suwannee County, FL
As the Florida Sheriff's Association has made abundantly clear, they have been unable to prosecute Accidental Exposure of a Firearm. They could harass, arrest, make you hire a lawyer for hearings, etc... Make your life hard for carrying a gun. But in the end, be unable to actually get you convicted. They've tried like hell, but never managed to.

Bogdanoff's killer amendment transforms SB234 into a weapon that will allow them to finally secure that prosecution. It does not protect CCers from accidental exposure. It creates subjective language that enables the currently abusive Police policies that can't get traction, to finally have that traction based on an anti-gun Officer's subjective interpretation, or just outright fabrication.

Bogdanoff's Amendment secures that final step of prosecuting CCers. It does not protect CCers at all. It does entirely the opposite.

She and her supports can SAY anything they want to the supposed INTENT. An examination of current Police Policies, heavily documented actions, open statements, and a plain reading of her amendment, proves what it will ACTUALLY do.

If the bill passes as amended, even CC with a Permit in perfectly legal fashion will become unsafe for permit holders to do. Any cop with an agenda, or anti-gun citizen with a chip on their shoulder, will be able to land a legal CCer in jail.

I hate to say it, but toljaso. I said the LEOs would turn it into a weapon against us. And they did. Not even CC is safe now. This has made the whole of 790.06 utterly useless. They have practically abolished all forms of carry in the State. Only the Rich and Well Connected will be able to carry now, regardless of having a permit or following the law.

I put off moving out of state in the hopes that this would happen. But I have to look at the timeline now. I don't want to live out the rest of my life with the futile Hope for Change lifestyle. I want to actually live what is left of my life with some degree of freedom. Maybe FL will have OC, but I'll be long dead of old age by the time it happens. This was our best, real chance. It's over.

No one is more about the fight than I am. But I've been in it for far too long. I've been at war with this State for almost 20 years. Nothing good has ever happened, not even once. It only gets worse and worse. I gotta retire from the war someday. Today is that day. I'm already showing serious signs of "Fight dragons long enough, and you become one." I'm not the man for this job anymore, and it's quite debatable that I ever really was.... ;-)

I've been shot at, kids kidnapped, house shot full of holes, run down on my motorcycle, arrested, maliciously prosecuted, beaten to a bloody pulp; and all of that multiple times. All of this done to me BY THE SAME PEOPLE WHO WIPED OUT THIS BILL. It's time to concede that Floriduh is Lost. My only hope now is for the day I get to watch it burn. It is a Police State, and will never be recovered but by outright force and the spilling of blood.

As 790.06 is currently written, it doesn't address accidental exposure at all. Judges have ruled that accidents are not within the spirit or intent of the law. So, the bogus charges don't stick. We have precedent as our protection.

With this bill as amended, the LEOs get to add in their own opinion of your intent to determine if the now statutory exception applies to you or not.
They have made their position on how they intend to abuse this very clear over the past 24 years, and very vocally during committee debates over this bill.

The bill, as amended, serves no purpose but to expose CCers to more trouble, not protect them from it. And I'm pretty sure that was the game from the beginning.
 
Last edited:

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
Nice talking to all of you throughout this ordeal. Thanks to Stogie and Rich for all their hard work. My anger at statism is unhealthy, especially when it comes to gun rights, so I'll be signing off from the forum for awhile, assuming I don't move to a freer state out of disgust. Peace.
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
So much for inalienable and shall not be infringed. We never wanted "exposure" protection. We wanted open carry.
 

maps761

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
44
Location
Florida
It's not a viable bill unless the House and Senate versions are exactly the same. Maybe the tactic to follow is convince our House reps to just refuse to change their version. That would at a minimum kill the whole thing or maybe convince the Senate to kill this amendment.

Just pondering.
 

j4l

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2011
Messages
1,835
Location
fl
One could but hope, but seeing how things are playing out, and how few of our Politfails have an nads, they'll probably end up changing it to match 234 instead..

:banghead: :banghead:
 

nigmalg

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
148
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
We need to have an attorney review the amendment and bill as amended. Only if they concur that this gives the police greater authority in harassing permit holders should we throw it out.

I understand the danger in subjectivity or ambiguity; however, considering the makeup of the Senate, can we do any better in the near future anyways?
 

WwRGSwW

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
30
Location
Orlando, FL
Lets say they pass 234 in its current state, why cant they just come up with another bill after? Is there a thing that prevents them from doing so?
 

nigmalg

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
148
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
As a second point, we should put together "The List" of individuals, representatives, companies that publicly campaigned against open carry.

1.) Companies should be boycotted (including affiliates and sponsors)
2.) Senators/Reps should be replaced and/or endorsements removed
 

ixtow

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Messages
5,038
Location
Suwannee County, FL
Exactly my point. So only after careful review of this amendment should we consider throwing the "baby out with the bathwater".

It wouldn't be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Most of what is left of the bill is stuff we already have.

We already had parking lots. The contiguous states long gun purchase was unenforcible and vestigial. So, neither of those points matter.

All the bill does now is give the LEOs a way to get us prosecuted for accidental exposure; the opposite of what it was meant to be.
 

seminoles1999

New member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Messages
121
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
Evers also sponsored a bill that initially allowed the open carrying of weapons by those with concealed-weapons permits. The bill was amended Wednesday by Sen. Ellyn Bogdanoff, R-Fort Lauderdale, to eliminate the misdemeanor charge in current law for the inadvertent display of a concealed weapon. Bogdanoff said the end product was what the NRA really wanted.

"The bill as presented by Senator Evers is an open-carry bill. There was a great deal of concern expressed by the retail community," Bogdanoff said. "The amendment is changing the bill to address the concern (about inadvertent exposure) and not going all the way and saying you can wear it in the open, exposed."

Bogdanoff said the Florida Retail Federation and other previously opposed business interests accepted the amended version.

[video=youtube;5D6qhFobCBA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D6qhFobCBA[/video]

Source: Lobbytools & http://floridacapitalnews.com/article/20110428/CAPITOLNEWS/104280317&theme=
 
Last edited:

firedog

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
156
Location
FL/NC
Evers also sponsored a bill that initially allowed the open carrying of weapons by those with concealed-weapons permits. The bill was amended Wednesday by Sen. Ellyn Bogdanoff, R-Fort Lauderdale, to eliminate the misdemeanor charge in current law for the inadvertent display of a concealed weapon. Bogdanoff said the end product was what the NRA really wanted.

"The bill as presented by Senator Evers is an open-carry bill. There was a great deal of concern expressed by the retail community," Bogdanoff said. "The amendment is changing the bill to address the concern (about inadvertent exposure) and not going all the way and saying you can wear it in the open, exposed."

Bogdanoff said the Florida Retail Federation and other previously opposed business interests accepted the amended version.

Source: http://floridacapitalnews.com/article/20110428/CAPITOLNEWS/104280317&theme=
I think the retail association was more influential then the FSA. It sucks either way. The most disappointing thing is the position of the NRA. Their failure & inappropriate compromise on 2A rights in SB234 was deplorable. They will not see another dime of my money and it will go to the GOA. They are supposed to be an un-compromising group. Maybe we can build their rosters..
 

KeepShootin

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Messages
38
Location
?
So, not only did they remove open carry, BUT, they also made the $1,000,000 fine go down to $100,000, AND NOW $5,000? TALK ABOUT A SLAP ON THE WRIST! What is wrong with these people?!
 

rvrctyrngr

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
363
Location
SE of DiSOrDEr, ,
I think the retail association was more influential then the FSA. It sucks either way. The most disappointing thing is the position of the NRA. Their failure & inappropriate compromise on 2A rights in SB234 was deplorable. They will not see another dime of my money and it will go to the GOA. They are supposed to be an un-compromising group. Maybe we can build their rosters..

The GOA has accomplished what, exactly....ever?
 

77zach

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2007
Messages
2,913
Location
Marion County, FL
The GOA has accomplished what, exactly....ever?

GOA is a national group, they don't really concentrate at state level.

Do we know if the NRA is satisfied with the new language? Evers does support intentional open carry, or else that original amendment would never have been introduced, the one with the "level 2" holsters and ID display. I think Hammer arguing for our right to open carry would be powerful. Without any of their support we face a tough road. Texas is doing it, but Florida isn't Texas. Sean said he was drafting a bill that might get the FSA off our backs. Good thought, but I don't see how its possible.

Bottom line is that the NRA would be a powerful ally. Does Marion Hammer have an email address at USF or NRA? I can't find one. A little evangelism on our part toward her might be in order. The NRA should be promoting open carry at ever turn. There is no more powerful way to reverse the police state and to make the anti-gunners irrelevant. If guns are normed into every day life, I don't see how "gun control" can survive. Right now, they're dirty evil icky things that we have to hide like our private parts. The message the current open carry law in Florida sends is pretty clear: Guns are evil unless the state has them.
 
Top