HB 517 OC Bill passes last committee!

[Phssthpok]

What's the name of that case again?

I think Florida V JL is what's being referenced.

 

[rvrctyrngr]

I think Florida V JL is what's being referenced.

Egg-zactly right.

Trial court suppressed the gun as evidence, DCA reversed on appeal, Fl Supreme Court reversed the reversal. SCOTUS upheld the reversed reversal. Ain't the legal system grand?:shocker:

 

[maps761]

Youtube Video of Judiciary Committee Debate

I posted a youtube video of Lt. Hernandez and Sheriff Coats from the House Judiciary Committee debate of 3/24.

Here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ALgGpTMj8k

 

[Mas49.56]

The one thing that confuses me in this bill is the right to store a firearm in my car for lawful purposes. Is this just the same right we Floridians enjoy now or is it new like storage in the parking lots of the banned places(elementary schools, police stations, airports, etc...) Post offices? The DMV is not on that list so I assume we can ignore the no weapons signs there and OC if this passes in present form. Can you be trespassed from public buildings in Florida for a lawful activity? I guess this has never been put to the test because we all are CC. Gonna be some interesting times coming up.

 

[Rich7553]

The one thing that confuses me in this bill is the right to store a firearm in my car for lawful purposes. Is this just the same right we Floridians enjoy now or is it new like storage in the parking lots of the banned places(elementary schools, police stations, airports, etc...) Post offices? The DMV is not on that list so I assume we can ignore the no weapons signs there and OC if this passes in present form. Can you be trespassed from public buildings in Florida for a lawful activity? I guess this has never been put to the test because we all are CC. Gonna be some interesting times coming up.

Ok. Let me see if I can square this away for you.

Here's the what: When 790.251 (gun at work in car) was passed, it was immediately challenged in court by the Florida Chamber of Commerce. The court found that only the portion that protected employees was constitutional. Guests, visitors, and those who do not have a concealed carry license were not protected under the statute. The bill would change that to protect anyone having a firearm in their car for lawful purposes.

Here's the where: With regards to parking lots of schools, you are already permitted to have a securely encased gun in your car on school grounds under an exception to 790.115. However, school districts are permitted to waive that exception for the purpose of campus and student parking privileges if they clearly publish same. Colleges have adopted that same waiver, but there is at least one court case in the FL 5th District Court of Appeal (789 So.2d 530, FL v. Ragland), where the judge specifically mentions this discrepancy. So the answer to schools is a definite...maybe.

Parking lots of police stations, DMV (tax collector), and airports are fine. Parking lots of post offices and VA clinics/hospitals are definite no-nos as they are federally prohibited. A state statute will have no affect on those places.

Finally, parking lots of those places listed in 790.251(7) remain off-limits.

 

[~*'Phoenix'*~]

I posted a youtube video of Lt. Hernandez and Sheriff Coats from the House Judiciary Committee debate of 3/24.

Here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ALgGpTMj8k

"they'll draw down on them until they neutralize the threat"? And "they'll challenge these inddividuals, and something bad may very well happen"?
Um, what threat?
And, the only bad that that will happen is you guys overreacting and shooting us.

 

[Mas49.56]

Thank you Rich! That helped me understand what it's fixing.

 

[ixtow]

I posted a youtube video of Lt. Hernandez and Sheriff Coats from the House Judiciary Committee debate of 3/24.

Here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ALgGpTMj8k

They're so used to getting away with it, they don't realize they've incriminated themselves. And consider their audience, birds of a feather...

 

[nigmalg]

They're so used to getting away with it, they don't realize they've incriminated themselves. And consider their audience, birds of a feather...

I just watched this portion of the video for the first time. Didn't he technically threaten to break the law?

 

[ixtow]

I just watched this portion of the video for the first time. Didn't he technically threaten to break the law?

Yep! I knew they couldn't restrain themselves for long. Now the true colors are showing and, I hope, it will be their undoing. At this point, who can take them seriously?

They certainly can't claim ignorance, the Big Cheese of that department knows! He better tell them how it goes. If he willfully disseminates illegal policies, oh, the warm fuzzy feelings I will have inside...

I'm sure some City and County Attorneys are educating him on the difference between inflammatory, anti-constitutional rhetoric, and the law...

 

[theforge]

HB Status

I reviewed the bill's status and here is what happened:

Current status says it was laid on table in accordance to Rule 7.19(a) then a CS was filed. What does this mean? From reading the rules my interpretation when a bill is laid on the table it has received a negative recommendation and then you have the CS files, which implies substitute. This is all local political jargon and means nothing to me as a citizen, so can somebody explain?

 

[77zach]

I reviewed the bill's status and here is what happened:

Current status says it was laid on table in accordance to Rule 7.19(a) then a CS was filed. What does this mean? From reading the rules my interpretation when a bill is laid on the table it has received a negative recommendation and then you have the CS files, which implies substitute. This is all local political jargon and means nothing to me as a citizen, so can somebody explain?

The house will pass it easily, once it gets to the floor. It all depends on the senate committees, first judiciary then rules. Assuming they let it have a hearing, all democrats will most likely vote no. There is also a republican anti-gun bigot who chairs the rules committee and is also a member of the judiciary committee.

 

[nigmalg]

The house will pass it easily, once it gets to the floor. It all depends on the senate committees, first judiciary then rules. Assuming they let it have a hearing, all democrats will most likely vote no. There is also a republican anti-gun bigot who chairs the rules committee and is also a member of the judiciary committee.

I was under the impression Thrasher was supportive with the college campus provision gone.. Have you heard otherwise?

 

[77zach]

I was under the impression Thrasher was supportive with the college campus provision gone.. Have you heard otherwise?

No. But the fact he did what he did proves that he doesn't believe in the right to bear arms. It's a political slogan for him. If he can find an excuse, like half a dozen sheriffs and prosecutor friends vigorously testifying against it, he may vote no.

 

[Thundar]

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.

What does that a$$hat sheriff do when people are legally opencarrying while fishing or camping?

 

[Rich7553]

No. But the fact he did what he did proves that he doesn't believe in the right to bear arms. It's a political slogan for him. If he can find an excuse, like half a dozen sheriffs and prosecutor friends vigorously testifying against it, he may vote no.

Incorrect. Thrasher nixed campus carry because he was personal friends with the Cowey family, whose daughter Ashley was the girl killed by the idiot with the AK-74 at the frat house off-campus of FSU. Dr. Cowey is also one of Thrasher's biggest $$$$ contributors. Thrasher has no problem with the rest of the bill to my knowledge.

 

[Rich7553]

I reviewed the bill's status and here is what happened:

Current status says it was laid on table in accordance to Rule 7.19(a) then a CS was filed. What does this mean? From reading the rules my interpretation when a bill is laid on the table it has received a negative recommendation and then you have the CS files, which implies substitute. This is all local political jargon and means nothing to me as a citizen, so can somebody explain?

When a committee substitute is proposed, the original is "laid on the table" pending the outcome of the adoption of the substitute. The original is taken off the table when the substitute is either adopted or rejected. If adopted the original is replaced. If rejected, the original is active again.

 

[FzSBLACKMAGICK]

It now says they had a 1st reading at 6:03 pm last night.


Last Event: 1st Reading on Monday, March 28, 2011 6:03 PM

 

[theforge]

So what does this mean now? From reading the rules, it sounds like the introduction of the substitute, and now that must go through committee. Is that the case?

 

[77zach]

Incorrect. Thrasher nixed campus carry because he was personal friends with the Cowey family, whose daughter Ashley was the girl killed by the idiot with the AK-74 at the frat house off-campus of FSU. Dr. Cowey is also one of Thrasher's biggest $$$$ contributors. Thrasher has no problem with the rest of the bill to my knowledge.

So $ and political office are more important to him than defense of the bill of rights. I would hope whoever runs against him next time makes this known far and wide. What a POS.