FL Carry Reform Bill in Committee needs YOUR HELP NOW!


PDA






StogieC
February 12, 2011, 11:18 AM
FLORIDA CARRY LEGISLATIVE ALERT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - February 12, 2011
SB 234 - FL Senate Committee on Criminal Justice
Hearing scheduled for 2/22/11

SB 234 is on the agenda of the FL Senate Committee on Criminal Justice on Tuesday, February 22nd at 9:00am. Florida Carry, Inc. urgently requests that you email via the members of the committee in support of Senate Bill 234.

This NRA authored bill comprises several separate initiatives. These include the option for CWFL holders to carry openly; a provision to authorize carry at career centers, colleges, and universities; the right to store a firearm in one's vehicle wherever it may be lawfully parked; the authorization for the Department of Agriculture to take fingerprints; the repeal of Florida’s ban on long gun purchases in most other states. Quite simply put, this is the most comprehensive carry rights bill since shall-issue concealed carry was passed twenty-four years ago.

Florida is one of only seven states where open carry of firearms is generally forbidden, excepting under certain circumstances. Arguments against open carry generally consist of concerns regarding the fearful reactions of the general population. Some have suggested that an open carrier becomes an instant target, having his firearm snatched by a criminal in line at a convenience store. The facts simply do not support those allegations. In states where open carry is lawfully practiced, citizens have become accustomed to the understanding that a holstered weapon is a danger to no one. There have been no wholesale attacks on open carriers, nor have open carriers been shot with their own weapons. Police officers are not fearful of open carriers as they know that a 5-year FBI crime study has shown that criminals do not open carry, nor do they carry in holsters. Criminals shun attention, something that the open carrying of a firearm invariably draws to some extent. Not a single state that has legalized open carry in recent years has repealed the right.

In 1987, open carry was outlawed primarily because of the predictions of wild west shootouts, blood in the streets, gun battles over parking spaces, and normally law abiding people indiscriminately becoming homicidal maniacs. The main opponent of open carry was Janet Reno, then assistant state attorney. She was able to rally support from a vocal group of police administrators with the doom and gloom scenarios. Amazingly enough, the exact same arguments were heard against "shall-issue" concealed carry. Twenty-four years later, and none of the rampant bloodshed predictions about concealed carry have come true.

With regard to carry on colleges and universities, it is not coincidence that most of the mass shootings in the U.S. occur on the campuses of educational institutions. To believe that a potential assailant would be dissuaded from committing mass murder simply because there is a law forbidding him to bring a firearm on campus is pure folly. Rape, robbery, assault, and murder have all occurred on campuses across the country.

College and university administrators continue to deny the reality that by prohibiting students, faculty, staff, and visitors from defending themselves promotes an unsafe environment. Often ignored by opponents is the fact that only concealed weapons/firearms license holders would be permitted to carry on campus, and the minimum age requirement to have a license is 21. Those students under 21 would not be permitted to carry on campus. Once again, the potential criminals do not care about minimum age or having a license. After all, there are no barriers to access on most campuses. Florida Carry, Inc. supports SB 234, and encourages all gun owners/carriers to join us in contacting the senators on the Florida Senate Criminal Justice Committee. Please tell them 24 years is enough.

We urgently need you to email the committee members NOW!
Include “Support SB 234” in the Subject Line

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

TO:
evers.greg.web@flsenate.gov
dean.charles.web@flsenate.gov
dockery.paula.web@flsenate.gov
margolis.gwen.web@flsenate.gov
smith.chris.web@flsenate.gov

SUBJECT:
Support SB 234 – Support the Second Amendment


Dear Senator,

This e-mail is to express my support for Senate Bill 234, Firearms. As a member of the Florida Senate Committee on Criminal Justice, you will be hearing this bill on Tuesday, February 22nd. I respectfully ask that you wholeheartedly support this bill.

The predictions of doom and gloom that preceded the adoption of "shall-issue" concealed carry have been proven to be fiction. For twenty-four years, Florida concealed weapons/firearms license holders have proven themselves to be responsible to the extreme. Since 1987, only 168 of nearly two-million licenses have been revoked due to misuse of firearms. It is time to recognize that responsibility by giving those licensees the option to carry their firearms in the manor that is most appropriate to their situation, openly or concealed. In the 43 states that permit some form of general open carry, not a single state has repealed that right.

It is also time to recognize that criminals have discovered a target-rich environment at colleges and universities. Rapes, robberies, assaults, and other violent crimes continually occur at and near campuses on students, faculty, and staff alike. Concealed weapons/firearms license holders should not have to relinquish the ability to defend themselves because of a mistaken belief that criminals obey campus restrictions.

Please support SB 234.

Respectfully yours,



<your name>

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you enjoyed reading about "FL Carry Reform Bill in Committee needs YOUR HELP NOW!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Big Mike
February 15, 2011, 10:34 PM
Also, for those who want to follow the committee, here is their page:

http://www.flsenate.gov/Committees/Show/CJ/

I anticipate this will be broadcast (some are some aren't), I would go here to the media page during the day of the meeting and you can watch it all. On the day of the meeting, if it is broadcast, it will be on this page, in the box "Today's Video Broadcast Schedule".

http://www.flsenate.gov/Media/

mljdeckard
February 15, 2011, 11:01 PM
This is good, but it's a few big bites to swallow all at once. Is it likely to pass? (Another state jealous of Utah's Brady grade. :)

tyeo098
February 16, 2011, 01:00 AM
I always add a little Thanks for being the voice of the people! to the end of my emails to let them know where they stand ;)

Rail Driver
February 16, 2011, 01:44 AM
I sent my emails out several days ago, and I got a (likely canned or written by a secretary) response from Senator Charles Dean the next day:

Thank you for voicing your support of Senator Evers' Senate Bill 234. As a lifelong member of the NRA and a former Sheriff, I know firsthand how important the issues are surrounding our second amendment rights. Senate Bill 234 would allow people in compliance with the concealed carry license to carry a concealed weapon into more areas than originally allowed. Senate Bill 234 is scheduled to be heard in the Criminal Justice Committee, a committee I serve on, on February 22, 2011. When Senate Bill 234 is brought before me, I will remember your e-mail. You can follow Senate Bill 234 by logging on to www.flsenate.gov. Please continue to write to me on issues important to you or whenever I may be of any assistance.

-Charlie

pikid89
February 16, 2011, 01:47 AM
emails sent along with the explanation that i was writing them as a University of Florida Student Class of 2012

tyeo098
February 16, 2011, 12:01 PM
I got the same response this morning.

JayBird
February 16, 2011, 05:33 PM
Sent.

Deus Machina
March 6, 2011, 10:05 PM
Bumping this up to the top.

Got the NRA email; this is to be heard on Wednesday, March 9. I just sent my messages out to the senators.

Anyone else in Florida, I urge you to do the same. Email, fax, call, make them hear us. This needs to get passed!

Dan Forrester
March 7, 2011, 02:54 AM
Just sent out emails to all except Greg Evers. I believe he is the author of the bill. Maybe a word of thanks to him would be appropriate. I plan to follow it up with phone calls since it is probably taken more seriously than an email. Even if it takes you 5 minutes per call that’s not more than 25 minutes out of your day tomorrow. Please give them a call Monday or Tuesday.

Greg Evers - (850) 487-5000
Charles Dean - (850) 487-5017
Paula Dockery - (850) 487-5040
Gwen Margolis - (850) 487-5121
Chris Smith - (850) 487-5112

NRA Score From Project Vote Smart. Be sure to call all of these people especially the bottom two:

Greg Evers: A+ in 2004 and 2010
Charles Dean: A rating in 2002 and A+ in 2004
Paula Dockery: A in 2000, A in 2001, and A+ in 2004
Gwen Margolis: F rating in 2010
Chris Smith: F rating in 2000, 2002, 2004

I usually custom tailor my emails based on their NRA rating. Emails to pro gun reps are usually words or support, encouragement and a reminder not to let us down. Emails to anti gun reps are full of talk about “liberalizing gun laws”, giving individuals the “right to choose” and references to firearm ownership as a “civil right’s issue”. I figure maybe it will remind them of what it truly means to be a liberal; something they forgot long ago.

Dan

Packman
March 7, 2011, 08:25 PM
I sent an email to each member of the committee separately. Below is what I said:

Dear _____________,

I am writing to you to ask that you support Senate Bill 234. As a member of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, your support for this bill is crucial. The measures presented within are extremely important to me.

As a concealed weapons licensee, the open carry proposal is one I look forward to with great anticipation. The requirement to conceal one's weapon at all times is frequently an uncomfortable proposition in Florida's climate, and the current statutory structure that penalizes accidental exposure is utterly unnecessary. Furthermore, as I have already been vouchsafed to carry a weapon about my person, the method and visibility of carry are, realistically, moot points. Essentially, allowing Open Carry of weapons for Concealed Weapons Licensees is a measure that allows a far greater amount of freedom to law abiding citizens, and creates no detriment to public safety.

Along with being licensed to carry a concealed weapon, I am also a college student. Unfortunately, under the present Florida Statutes, these two lifestyle choices are greatly at odds with one another. Every time I enter the campus, I am required to disarm myself. This provides no enhancement of safety to anyone but those bent upon doing harm to others. Statistics bear out that Concealed Weapons License holders are overwhelmingly law abiding. Firearms on College campuses present a danger only to those who would prey upon the weak. Allowing those Licensees to carry their firearms in a legal manner serves only to enhance the safety of all persons present. In no case has a legally possessed firearm on a college campus ever been used unlawfully. To those who argue against such extreme cases as the Virgina Tech shooting, I remind them that the young man who perpetrated that act was the only one armed because he broke the law. Had the law allowed the law abiding to arm themselves, the outcome could have been far less tragic.

Therefore, it is with great sincerity that I urge you to support the measures proposed in Senate Bill 234. These provisions will greatly enhance the freedoms of the law-abiding citizens of Florida, and yet present no detriment to the safety of all. To this voter, your support of this bill is of the greatest importance. I thank you for your time, and your service.

Respectfully,

Dan Forrester
March 8, 2011, 11:53 AM
Just made a couple phone calls; hope it helps. Where does it go from here if it makes it out of this committee?

Thanks, Dan

Packman
March 9, 2011, 05:12 PM
Well, I watched the feed of the committee discussing the bill. It was the last thing on the agenda, and thus had its time cut short. They had the head of the FSU police department speak at some length as to why he and many other police organizations opposed the bill, despite the fact that Senator Dockery's amendment has taken college carry off the table.

The head of Florida Open Carry got a whopping 30 seconds to speak (literally) before they stopped him and left the room without voting.

So? Now what happens?

sawdeanz
March 9, 2011, 08:10 PM
It's really unfortunate that they felt they had to remove the college carry part. It was definitely quite the topic of heated debate on the University of Florida campus, and a lot of backlash when our student body passed a resolution against campus carry. Open carry in Florida is still on the bill right?
I wish someone could explain how anti's can use events like Virginia Tech to ban guns on campus when that law was already in place and clearly didn't help. Most importantly though is that they can't get in their head that the right to carry guns on campus isn't to protect students from the great plague of mass murderers but to protect ones self while at school from robbers and rapists. Everytime I read something against guns it makes my blood boil!

Dan Forrester
March 9, 2011, 09:08 PM
It looks like there is another meeting scheduled for 3/14/11.

So Senator Dockery removed college carry? So much for her A rating from the NRA.

Dan

Deus Machina
March 10, 2011, 01:34 AM
I wish someone could explain how anti's can use events like Virginia Tech to ban guns on campus when that law was already in place and clearly didn't help.

I can. They run in backward, broken logic. "He what? Shooting up a school is one thing, but bringing a gun there is illegal, right? Didn't he see the signs? Put up bigger signs so it won't happen again!"

To be completely honest, I'm thinking that campus carry may have been a bargaining chip in this case. "Fine, we don't need to allow responsible people to carry on campus, but since they carry everywhere else, how about you let them show who they are?"

Campus carry had me just as eager, if not more, than open. But we need to pass all we can now. We can fight for more later, hopefully with a committee with fewer F-rated members we have to appease.

sarduy
March 10, 2011, 04:55 AM
any word from the bill yet?

nigmalg
March 10, 2011, 09:26 AM
The bill was amended at the last minute yesterday in the CJ committee.

In addition to the remove of College Carry completely, they've also put in language requiring a Level II retention holster and the requirement to display your concealed license in a clear plastic sleeve near the holster. There's also a requirement to be trained in weapon retention.

Under "Amendments":
http://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0234

Some are saying that it was Dean who pressured for these amendments last minute. I do remember him saying on video during the hearing that the "Sheriffs Association" was responsible for suggesting the amendments.

There's a couple ways to repair the bill:


Call your Florida senators on the CJ committee before the next meeting (March 14th), and remind them that they're elected. Hopefully we can have follow up floor amendments to remove the garbage.
Push your house representatives to pass the clean version of the bill, HB517, so we can (maybe?) skip the CJ committee and put pressure on the FL Senate.

MagnumDweeb
March 10, 2011, 10:37 AM
So did the amendments functionally neuter the bill. Other open carry states don't have these restrictions and "training" requirements.

AWorthyOpponent
March 10, 2011, 11:34 AM
I don't really mind the retention requirement, personally. The biggest problem i see is:
Line 54 - Demonstrates competence with a firearm and firearm retention by any one of the following
Does that mean that those of us with a current CWFL are going to be in violation?

As for:
(b) Carrying openly requires that the carrier display his or her license to carry a concealed firearm in a clear sleeve on or near the holster in such a manner as to be visible.

That's ridiculous. I don't mind showing my CWFL to LEO's if they ask, but displaying it in a sleeve looks stupid and introduces one more thing for LE to complain about. I hate carrying extra **** on my belt and this would just mean one more thing to have to worry about losing. Right now, i know i have my permit because I never take it out of my wallet.

harmon rabb
March 10, 2011, 12:05 PM
The bill was amended at the last minute yesterday in the CJ committee.

In addition to the remove of College Carry completely, they've also put in language requiring a Level II retention holster and the requirement to display your concealed license in a clear plastic sleeve near the holster. There's also a requirement to be trained in weapon retention.

Under "Amendments":
http://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0234

Some are saying that it was Dean who pressured for these amendments last minute. I do remember him saying on video during the hearing that the "Sheriffs Association" was responsible for suggesting the amendments.

There's a couple ways to repair the bill:
Call your Florida senators on the CJ committee before the next meeting (March 14th), and remind them that they're elected. Hopefully we can have follow up floor amendments to remove the garbage.
Push your house representatives to pass the clean version of the bill, HB517, so we can (maybe?) skip the CJ committee and put pressure on the FL Senate

Those amendments were put in there to ensure it didn't die in committee. There was 3 R's, 2 D's on that committee and two of the R's were the bill's sponsors. It's pretty obvious they added whatever amendments they had to in order to get the other R to sign on, and they will try to remove it later.

StogieC
March 10, 2011, 04:40 PM
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>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

gatorjames85
March 10, 2011, 04:52 PM
Done.

nigmalg
March 10, 2011, 05:41 PM
Sent as well. I clicked "send" very loudly.

sawdeanz
March 10, 2011, 05:54 PM
Thanks for the update. This is outrageous and I sent a very thoughtfully worded letter as well

sarduy
March 14, 2011, 04:42 PM
Last Event: 03/14/11 S CS by Criminal Justice; YEAS 3 NAYS 2 on Monday, March 14, 2011 2:37 PM

now, what's the next step?

AWorthyOpponent
March 14, 2011, 06:20 PM
Last Event: 03/14/11 S CS by Criminal Justice; YEAS 3 NAYS 2 on Monday, March 14, 2011 2:37 PM

now, what's the next step?

I'm Wondering the same thing...

I did get this sent from NRA-ILA
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=6415

But, that's about HB 517 (http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0517). effectively the same thing...

StogieC
March 14, 2011, 06:50 PM
House Criminal Justice Subcommittee tomorrow

Then 2 more committee stops in each chamber before going to the floors.

sarduy
March 15, 2011, 12:25 PM
i really hope this get through.

pikid89
March 15, 2011, 12:42 PM
honestly, im not so sure that this version of the bill should be approved...im all for open carry but the amendments that have been attatched are rediculous first they hacked out the campus carry (im a student at UF so that really burns me)
then they added
a. Retention Training Required
b. Level II retention holster required ($$$/not available for many guns)
c. CCW permit to be displayed in a clear sleeve on or near the holster

WTH thats insane
...the general consensus is CCW badges are at best a joke, and at worst borderline dangerous...how is this any different

StogieC
March 15, 2011, 01:52 PM
all of the holster requirements and training and ID display JUNK is gone from the bill.

EnderWiggin
March 15, 2011, 02:50 PM
This site: http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=44867

shows the amendments to the bill and it doesn't look like the stupid amendment of having to display your CWL was removed. You can see edit: SD 245176, Criminal Justice, Evers Date Filed: 03/09/11 where they added the stupid amendments.

My question is: there is a similar bill in the house (HB517) that is NOT neutered... so does this mean that if that passes it will override SB234?

StogieC
March 15, 2011, 03:32 PM
Read the committee substitute here:

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=_s0234c1.DOCX&DocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=0234&Session=2011

StogieC
March 15, 2011, 03:33 PM
There is nothing wrong with open carry in SB 234 as amended now.

You missed amendment 973004 It got rid of that holster ID and training junk.

EnderWiggin
March 15, 2011, 04:35 PM
Oh alright. Thanks. My other question still stands though... if HB517 passes with it's college carry... will it override the SB234 without the college carry?

StogieC
March 15, 2011, 04:37 PM
College carry is out of HB 517 as of today. The bills are (nearly) identical.

EnderWiggin
March 15, 2011, 04:49 PM
College carry is out of HB 517 as of today. The bills are (nearly) identical.
-.- Oh well... deep down inside I knew this bill would not pass with college carry in it. As long as they dont nerf anything else.

sarduy
March 15, 2011, 08:10 PM
is there a video of this? so i can watch it? i turn "the florida channel" at 8am today and i didn't see anything untill like 10am

StogieC
March 15, 2011, 11:11 PM
No video that I could find of the House committee. I'll be in touch with the powers that be about making sure that the other hearings on this bill are streamed.

cbrgator
March 17, 2011, 03:00 PM
Oh alright. Thanks. My other question still stands though... if HB517 passes with it's college carry... will it override the SB234 without the college carry?

No. Both houses have to vote on a bill to send it to the governor. Bills cannot override other bills (unless the legislature votes to do so). Once HB517 passes in the house, it gets sent to the Senate. Then the Senate votes on the House Bill. If the Senate passes it, it goes to the governor.

This process is the same if the Senate passes a bill first and sends it to the House.


Yesterday, the Senate Bill advanced and is now before the Judiciary Committee.

MagnumDweeb
March 17, 2011, 05:39 PM
I just sent off for my CCW permit renewal last week. I'm anxious. I've got $500 put aside for holsters. I'm not going to open carry but I like having the option. If it passes I am going to invest in a shoulder carry rig to wear under button up shirts, and should it print, it won't be a big deal if this gets passed.

sarduy
March 18, 2011, 09:11 PM
i want it to pass!

Nero_Atrum
March 24, 2011, 05:14 PM
So did it pass?:confused:

StogieC
March 24, 2011, 07:31 PM
HB 517 has passed committee and will go to the House Floor.
SB 234 is still in committee.

AWorthyOpponent
March 24, 2011, 08:15 PM
Given that all of this goes through like we are hoping, how many other steps are there to this? It seems that they are postponing the inevitable as much as possible.

StogieC
March 24, 2011, 08:27 PM
House Floor.
Two more committees in the Senate, then to the Senate Floor.

If the versions are IDENTICAL once they pass both house and Senate the act goes to the governor.

If the versions are different they go to a conference committee. Once the conference creates a common version both floors vote again to either send it to the Governor or back to committee.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

Big Mike
March 24, 2011, 10:18 PM
It was an interesting committee meeting at the House Judiciary Committee this morning... From Marion Hammer, NRA, I learned that apparently in 1987 when the FL legislature was attempting to pass concealed carry, the law enforcement (LE) at the time objected and preferred that there was "open carry" as they could more easily identify people carrying handguns. Now it's the reverse with many LE and the FL Sheriff's Association objecting to the legislation. Interesting...

bbuddtec
March 25, 2011, 12:10 AM
I already told Paula what I feel.

sarduy
March 25, 2011, 03:21 AM
so... from there, what's the next step? gov sign?

nigmalg
March 25, 2011, 03:42 PM
It was an interesting committee meeting at the House Judiciary Committee this morning... From Marion Hammer, NRA, I learned that apparently in 1987 when the FL legislature was attempting to pass concealed carry, the law enforcement (LE) at the time objected and preferred that there was "open carry" as they could more easily identify people carrying handguns. Now it's the reverse with many LE and the FL Sheriff's Association objecting to the legislation. Interesting...

I'm under the impression you would get the same attitude if shall-issue were up again in the legislature. It appears the Sheriff's Association simply doesn't want civilians armed.

SB234 seems delayed a bit. I'm hoping it gets scheduled in the Judiciary next week. Hopefully HB517 will be added to the floor calendar the week of April 4th.

Still a few more steps to get this through. The legislature is a slow beast.

PcolaDawg
March 25, 2011, 04:00 PM
GREAT updates. Keep 'em coming. I've got my fingers crossed.

cbrgator
April 8, 2011, 04:16 AM
Quick Update:

After more than 3 weeks of dithering, the Senate Judiciary Committee has finally scheduled SB 234 on the agenda. It is scheduled for this Tuesday April 12 at 1 PM.

sarduy
April 9, 2011, 06:49 PM
is there a link for the broadcast?

cbrgator
April 10, 2011, 03:44 AM
Don't know. Check the Senate website. If you find one, please post it here.

WhiteMikeCN
April 12, 2011, 02:33 AM
Today is a good day..... Hopefully!

EnderWiggin
April 12, 2011, 02:37 AM
Did the judiciary committee just change the bill from an open carry bill to a "allow the inadvertent display of a concealed firearm" bill?!?!

WhiteMikeCN
April 12, 2011, 02:39 AM
not from what I am reading....

EnderWiggin
April 12, 2011, 02:43 AM
This site shows a Judiciary substitution:
http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Bills/billsdetail.aspx?BillId=44867

"It shall not be a violation of this section for a person who is licensed to carry a concealed firearm, and who is lawfully carrying it in a concealed manner, to accidentally or inadvertently display the firearm to the ordinary sight of another person so long as the firearm is not displayed in a rude, angry, or threatening manner."

EDIT: You can also look under the amendments tab on this site: http://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0234

sarduy
April 12, 2011, 01:59 PM
that's the live broadcast 4/12/11 1:00pm

http://www.flsenate.gov/Media/

WhiteMikeCN
April 12, 2011, 02:50 PM
Here is the text

III. Effect of Proposed Changes:
The bill provides that a person who holds a valid concealed weapon or firearm license, issued by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs (DACS) under s. 790.06, F.S., may carry a weapon or firearm openly.

Also, the bill inserts a provision in s. 790.06(12), F.S., that specifically protects a licensed person from being prohibited from carrying or storing a firearm in a vehicle for lawful purposes.

A person who carries a weapon or firearm into one of the prohibited locations set forth in subsection (12) of s. 790.06, F.S., or a person who prohibits a licensee from carrying or storing a firearm in a vehicle for lawful purposes, commits a second degree misdemeanor if they do so knowingly and willfully under the provisions of the bill.

The bill also authorizes the DACS to take fingerprints from a license-applicant for inclusion with the application packet for a concealed weapon or firearm license. This provides the applicant with an additional place to have his or her prints taken if necessary.

Section 790.28, F.S., is repealed by the bill. It is the provision that limits Florida residents to the purchase of rifles and shotguns in contiguous states. Section 790.065, F.S., is amended to clarify
37 Pub. L. No. 99-308.
38 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(3) (1986). See David T. Hardy, The Firearms Owners’ Protection Act: A Historical and Legal Perspective, 17 CUMB. L. REV. 585, 633-34 (1986/1987).
39 18 U.S.C. § 922(t)(1).
BILL: CS/SB 234 Page 10
that a licensed dealer’s shotgun or rifle sale to a Florida resident in another state is subject only to the federal law and the law of the state wherein the transfer is made.
The bill takes effect upon becoming a law.

cbrgator
April 13, 2011, 10:51 PM
Enderwiggin, that language is found in an amendment that was later withdrawn. The text of the bill as we know it remains unchanged and still explicitly provides for open carry.

UPDATE:
Senate Bill 234 passed the Judiciary Committee today 4-3, mostly along party lines with the exception of Ellyn Bogdanoff R-District 25, voting NEA. The bill is scheduled for a vote in the Rules Committee this Friday at 9:15 AM.

If/When this bill passes the Rules Committee, the next step is a vote on the Senate floor. We are getting there!

cbrgator
April 15, 2011, 04:25 PM
Florida Senate Bill 234 - Open Carry has now passed its final its final committee and the next step should be a full vote on the Senate floor!!!

EnderWiggin
April 15, 2011, 04:32 PM
So what are the chances of the Senate passing it?

cbrgator
April 16, 2011, 04:10 PM
Well, the Senate is divided 28 Republican, 12 Democrat. This will not be a strictly party line vote, but my guess is the chances are pretty good.

For it not to pass, the Democrats would have to unanimously oppose this bill, and 9 Republicans would also have to oppose it. Of course, if any Democrats support the bill, that many more Republicans would have to oppose it. So, though pure speculation, my guess is we have a decent chance.

sarduy
April 16, 2011, 06:41 PM
for the love of god and the 2nd amendment , i hope it passes

cbrgator
April 21, 2011, 11:49 PM
Anybody know why HB 517 has been stagnant since March 28? SB 234 has been slowly advancing. Why is the house bill stuck?

TomKat
April 22, 2011, 12:17 AM
the senate website says 234 is on it's second reading... Does anyone have any idea when the vote will actually take place? and also when the accompanying HB517 will be voted on as well? I'm trying to pin down the date.

StogieC
April 22, 2011, 09:25 AM
234 will go to the floor before 517, some time in the next two weeks.

We're tracking a 20-20 tie in the Senate, a loss. Get out there and call your FL state senators!

Ed N.
April 22, 2011, 10:27 AM
Email sent to Senator Alexander.

StogieC
April 22, 2011, 02:33 PM
getting Alexander to vote for this bill will be a shock. work hard on him.

cbrgator
April 22, 2011, 06:56 PM
StogieC,

How are you tracking them? I'd like to see who stands where.

dayid
April 22, 2011, 07:12 PM
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0234

Click "Vote History"
Then the link there to see the YEA/NAY

cbrgator
April 22, 2011, 07:14 PM
Those are committee votes. Not the whole Senate.

Ed N.
April 22, 2011, 07:18 PM
getting Alexander to vote for this bill will be a shock. work hard on him.
Why would you say that? He's vice-chair of the rules committee, and he voted "Yea" there.

cbrgator
April 22, 2011, 07:30 PM
I don't know Alexander, but many times legislators will vote Yea in committee and then Nea on the Senate floor. Yea in committee does not necessarily translate into a vote, so be careful there.

Ed N.
April 22, 2011, 07:39 PM
Well, I emailed him today, and if I don't get a reply by Monday afternoon I'll call his office.

cbrgator
April 22, 2011, 09:32 PM
Stogie,

Why will 517 go to the floor before 234? Is it because the House is a gimme and the Senate is more questionable?

EnderWiggin
May 25, 2011, 02:38 PM
Its very difficult for me to understand the site where the bill is posted so does anyone have an update on the status of the open carry? Someone that has recently read the amendments and can make sense of it all?

WhiteMikeCN
May 25, 2011, 05:49 PM
Yeah I sure can.... It is no longer open carry! It has a clause in it that basically says that in the even of an inadvertent exposure you will not be held liable for a crime.

EnderWiggin
May 27, 2011, 10:24 AM
When is it expected to pass?

cbrgator
May 28, 2011, 03:42 PM
It passed already. Just waiting on Gov's signature. It's not open carry though. The bill just decriminalizes brief, inadvertent exposure.

TomKat
June 10, 2011, 09:57 PM
"06/08/2011 • Signed by Officers and presented to Governor"

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/234

TomKat
June 18, 2011, 02:28 PM
SIGNED!!! now it's the law!!! (small step for our rights, but I'll take it!) Us Floridians can now not get in trouble for printing or accidental showing of our weapons. :)

WhiteMikeCN
June 18, 2011, 02:58 PM
It does not say printing in the bill text.

TomKat
June 18, 2011, 04:24 PM
tit for tat... a brandishing charge is a far worse thing than printing, but now as long as it can be deemed unintentional, the spirit of the law applies and any judge or arbitrator will most likely agree on that point. Either way, I don't have to worry about it as much anymore.

If you enjoyed reading about "FL Carry Reform Bill in Committee needs YOUR HELP NOW!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!