Florida bill could hand gun owners huge win, make the US a constitutional carry majority country

[Will Munny]

First, Corporation's don't get taxed the people that use their services get taxed.

Wrong. The burden of any tax on a good or service depends on the elasticity of demand for that good or service. For the entire burden to fall on the people, you would need a perfectly inelastic demand, which does not exist.

 

[JN01]

A company isn't simply going to eat a tax increase either. If they can't make a profit, they won't be in business long. If prices don't increase, then costs will be reduced by other means. Groceries for example, where the box is the same size but the amount of product inside is reduced. Material quality may decrease. Labor costs may be reduced by shortening service hours, reducing the number of workers and/or replacing them with newer, lower wage, less skilled workers. In essence, it won't be the company bearing the brunt of a tax increase.

 

[Will Munny]

A company isn't simply going to eat a tax increase either. If they can't make a profit, they won't be in business long. If prices don't increase, then costs will be reduced by other means. Groceries for example, where the box is the same size but the amount of product inside is reduced. Material quality may decrease. Labor costs may be reduced by shortening service hours, reducing the number of workers and/or replacing them with newer, lower wage, less skilled workers. In essence, it won't be the company bearing the brunt of a tax increase.

Again wrong. Open any intermediate economics textbook and refer to what it says about tax burdens and elasticity of demand.
A company must eat some portion of the tax increase unless the demand is perfectly inelastic. No such good or service exists.
"If they can't make a profit, they won't be in business long" obviously, but that has nothing to do with who bears the burden of a tax.
"If prices don't increase, then costs will be reduced by other means." Prices to the consumer increase in relation to the elasticity. Period. Talk of other cost reductions is outside the scope of the issue. If those cost reductions were feasible in the status quo the firm would already have taken them.
"In essence, it won't be the company bearing the brunt of a tax increase." Wrong. There is no way to make such a statement without knowing the elasticity of demand for the good or service. If the demand is very elastic the company will bear most of the tax burden.

 

[JN01]

A company must eat some portion of the tax increase unless the demand is perfectly inelastic.

OK, so how do they make up the balance?

 

[Will Munny]

OK, so how do they make up the balance?

They can't. Its producer surplus that they loose. A tax transfers producer and consumer surplus to the taxing authority.
To quote from a text in a way that sums it up well.
"If demand is more inelastic than supply, consumers bear most of the tax burden, and if supply is more inelastic than demand, sellers bear most of the tax burden."
Theme parks are highly inelastic supplies, there are enormous fixed costs that must be met even with no customers.
I would also wager they are an elastic demand, at the end of the day they are a luxury vacation item that can be taken in any other state.

 

[dannyd]

Update on the Bill in Florida House. The Bills name as been changed to "Public Safety"

https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/543/ByCategory

 

[dannyd]

The old president of the NRA is really not helping things here in Florida I don't think.

ALERT! You Eat An Elephant One Bite At A Time

DATE: March 16, 2023
TO: USF & NRA Members and Friends
FROM: Marion P. Hammer
USF Executive Director
NRA Past President

HB-543 by Rep. Chuck Brannan and SB-150 by Sen. Jay Collins are clearly NOT "Constitutional Carry" bills.The bills should more appropriately be called "Permitless Concealed Carry."

Even though the bills are NOT "Constitutional Carry", the bills are a positive step forward for law-abiding gun owners. Both bills remove the requirement of a license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm as is currently required under Florida law and has been required since 1893. (over 125 years)

Under the proposed bills, the concealed weapon and firearm licensing program administered by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services is still in place and is virtually untouched. Therefore, people who wish to keep or acquire a license to carry concealed may continue to do so as in the past.

Many (maybe most) current license holders will choose to keep the license because it not only provides for reciprocity with other states but in addition, a license holder is exempt from the waiting period between the purchase and delivery of a firearm.

Both bills clearly state that an unlicensed person may carry a concealed weapon or firearm as defined in 790.06(1).

Further, in order to carry a concealed weapon or firearm without a license, a person must satisfy most of the criteria for receiving and maintaining a license under s. 790.06. However, the bills specifically eliminate self-defense as the specific reason for which a person may carry concealed and eliminates the training requirement in order to carry concealed without a license.

Nothing in either bill allows citizens to open carry a weapon or firearm.

While the bills may not be perfect and may not contain all of the provisions that many would like to see in the bill, they are nonetheless a good first step toward restoring the constitutional right to carry in Florida.

Incremental restoration is far better than no restoration. Some might say that restoring rights is much like eating an elephant, you do it one bite at a time.

HISTORY OF CARRYING FIREARMS IN FLORIDA

In 1893 the Florida Legislature passed legislation requiring a person to have a license to carry a firearm.

A Florida Supreme Court En Banc Opinion issued November 21, 1941 in
Watson v. Stone 148 Fla. 516 (Fla. 1941) • 4 So. 2d 700 contained a statement in a special written concurring opinion by Justice Rivers H. Buford:

Watson v. Stone, 4 So. 2d 700, 703 (Fla. 1941) (Buford, J., concurring)
"I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act of 1893 ...has been generally conceded to be in contravention of the Constitution and non-enforceable if contested."

The old Florida law delegated the issuing authority and development of the criteria for issuing to Florida's 67 individual County Commissions. Additionally, under the old law, a license to carry was only valid in the county of issuance.

In 1987 legislation passed that provided standardized, statewide criteria for issuance of a license to carry a concealed weapon or firearm. The license became valid statewide in Florida with the state being the sole issuing authority.

Over 2.6 million people currently possess a Florida Concealed Weapon or Firearm License.

Also in 1987, Florida law allowed for open carry of a firearm without a license.

Unfortunately, a Tallahassee TV reporter did a story claiming that people would not bother to get a concealed carry license because they could carry openly without a license.

Then Florida Governor Bob Martinez literally panicked. It didn't matter that open carry had never been a problem. Gov. Bob Martinez became hysterical and engineered the call for a Special Session in October 1987, and demanded that the law allowing open carry be repealed.

Stampeded by the anti-gun media, and by Governor Bob Martinez (who was clearly ignorant on firearms issues) the Legislature passed a bill making open carry of a weapon or firearm illegal.

In 2011, a bill to allow open carry of firearms for persons who had concealed carry licenses was moving through the Legislature. The plan was to incrementally restore open carry rights.

Unfortunately, members of a group called Florida Carry, Inc. opposed the bill because they wanted full open carry without a license. Some motorcycle gang members of the organization even stormed the Capitol wearing black leather with silver chains and started threatening legislators.

Florida Carry, Inc. officials refused to agree to incremental restoration and demanded full open carry - anytime and anywhere or nothing. They got nothing.

Clearly, the "all or nothing" folks today either don't know or didn't learn from history.

Opposing HB-543 and SB-150 is ill advised. Incremental restoration is much better than no restoration. In other words, something is always better than nothing and you can always continue to work for more. That's the nature of the legislative process.

It's important to understand that you climb a mountain one step at a time. If you keep throwing yourself off a cliff and falling to the bottom, you'll never get to the top of the mountain.

 

[usaral63]

Lemme clarify dannyd's post just a bit..........the real driving force behind the open carry prohibition was none other that then SAJanet Reno......later of both Waco and Ruby Ridge fame. She lobbied loudly and with the aid of our lovely defend the 1st at all costs press led the panic parade to our legislature. I was a sitting CLEO at the time of the '87 bill, we, the FPCA, knew that the '87 bill included UOC and neither our organization nor the FSA objected............it had simply never been an issue under the old licensing system. Further, under the old system neither single shot rifles nor shotguns of any type were unlawful to openly carry...

Licensing was an issue, with some of the more liberal areas refusing to do so.......guess which ones............still that old system was a mess and logic demanded it's correction. I also recall a case that I believe came out of the Clearwater/St. Pete area, or close, wherein a magistrate on a denial appeal stated that issuing authorities had a ministerial duty to do so if the applicant met the requirements...........bond (200) and character.

One interesting thing about the old law is that it was very lightly......if at all, enforced......ccw was merely a misd. and in actual fact until Leighton Baker got a bill passed it was by a strict reading of that old statute illegal to carry either a repeating rifle or pistol on a hunting trip less a license!...............Sorta put one in a technical bind if living in one county and hunting in another with grandpa's old '94.


I ought to add that in my opinion 'updating' this so called public safety bill will be very difficult and perhaps not achievable in the forseeable future....after all how many attempts have been so far made in getting the permitless issue this far. Furthermore it is my considered professional opinion that this bill is a shameful bid by the FSA to feather it's own nest. Those fellas used us all on the CC issue sweeping the Nation to jump into that train ride to mostly their own benefit. Consider also that any bad press due ULCCW will be capitalized on to our expense and that alone will supply our shakey legged legislatue with the incentive to at best hold fast and repeal at worst!

 

[BlueHeelerFl]

They can't. Its producer surplus that they loose. A tax transfers producer and consumer surplus to the taxing authority.
To quote from a text in a way that sums it up well.
"If demand is more inelastic than supply, consumers bear most of the tax burden, and if supply is more inelastic than demand, sellers bear most of the tax burden."
Theme parks are highly inelastic supplies, there are enormous fixed costs that must be met even with no customers.
I would also wager they are an elastic demand, at the end of the day they are a luxury vacation item that can be taken in any other state.

So when the price of fuel and energy go up the producer eats all of that as well?

The current price of eggs and other grocery items don't agree with this idea

 

[dannyd]

My take was this; The NRA threw us under the Bus Again. Last part of her article.

Unfortunately, members of a group called Florida Carry, Inc. opposed the bill because they wanted full open carry without a license. Some motorcycle gang members of the organization even stormed the Capitol wearing black leather with silver chains and started threatening legislators.

Florida Carry, Inc. officials refused to agree to incremental restoration and demanded full open carry - anytime and anywhere or nothing. They got nothing.

Clearly, the "all or nothing" folks today either don't know or didn't learn from history.

Opposing HB-543 and SB-150 is ill advised. Incremental restoration is much better than no restoration. In other words, something is always better than nothing and you can always continue to work for more. That's the nature of the legislative process.

It's important to understand that you climb a mountain one step at a time. If you keep throwing yourself off a cliff and falling to the bottom, you'll never get to the top of the mountain.

 

[kopcicle]

I honestly do not understand open carry. I understand the law but disagree with open carry in practice.
Let me try this. I am a life long motorcyclist. I choose to wear a helmet. Damn them for telling me I have to.
I do not oppose open carry laws. I will not walk about with an open carry gun that screams TAKE ME.

 

[usaral63]

DD: I truly don't think they threw us under the bus, it's more a matter of ineffective leadership than anything else.....Lotta dissention ongoing with the NRA itself.....which I deplore.......it seems the board itself is mostly to blame relative to the issues of fiscal management and the various legal matters now ongoing.....I'm NRA life, been involved with 'em since I was a boy scout and I'm now in my 80's. Really need to be re organized but in truth they ARE the voice that gets listened to..........witch is why Ms. Hamer was effective with the '87 bill, but truly she dropped the ball badly and there has been no one else till GOA began it's lobby campaign. I am a member of that org too, but they have yet to gain the credibility of the NRA, deserved or not.
No, other than on my way shootin' or huntin' I'm not gonna pack openly either, but the fact remains that as long as the practice remains unlawful it invites overzealous LE to misuse it..........I was a LEO for over three decades and I can tell you first hand that there are those sorts on a power trip that will do precisely that. No civil right, much less a clearly articulated part of our Constitution should be placed on a shaky balance board such as that, none!..
To that end I support open carry and a full restoration of that right.

As an aside I grew up in W.Va which in those times had extremely draconian laws governing carriage...mostly those laws passed in the '20s as a direct consequence of the coal mine wars that amounted to near civil war in portions of that state......All those restrictions are gone due to activists with a never quit attitude....something we badly need here. In the W.Va instance one rarely see's openly displayed guns, most folks simply don'tl As in Texas I suspect the same would be true in Florida.

All said I repeat my opinion that while this permitless matter will pass, anything else is a far, far away maybe that I personally think is unlikely...............and I'm still angry as the devil about the FSA........frankly I believe this matter proves they are unworthy of either political or monetary support!

 

[wayneinFL]

One thing at a time. I don't have a problem with us getting permitless carry passed. We can get open carry back next time around.

 

[dannyd]

One thing at a time. I don't have a problem with us getting permitless carry passed. We can get open carry back next time around.

I don't care ether way; the only thing permit less cary does is make it easier on people with permit's. I would never open carry this is not the Sandbox yet.

Just the NRA alway acts tough until they get behind close doors then throw's us under the bus.

 

[wayneinFL]

I don't care ether way; the only thing permit less cary does is make it easier on people with permit's. I would never open carry this is not the Sandbox yet.

Just the NRA alway acts tough until they get behind close doors then throw's us under the bus.

They just can't seem to get it back here in Florida. The Republicans don't have the spine for it. They need the money from big business to keep on top and they're practically owned by FRF and the big mouse.

How many open carry bills have there been? I think one got out of a subcommittee back in 2015.

I would never use open carry, but it's important.

Having open carry illegal is an absolute joke in a state with over 2 million residents with permits. And that's just the people who paid $150 to get a permit, and not the people just keep a pistol in the glovebox. That's a LOT of people walking a fine line between perfectly innocent walking from your shop or apartment to your car, and 60 days in jail. It's absolutely ridiculous.

Not to mention illegal open carry keeps non-gun people in a bubble. Last week, I heard a woman bragging her husband has a permit, like it made him special. Worse, there are people out there scared to death of anyone with a gun, not realizing they just walked passed a dozen armed citizens at the grocery store.

If open carry were legal and someone saw a tenth of what was really out there, it would make a difference.

 

[dannyd]

Wish I could say at any intersection on a busy highway show us what's in your car; people would definitely be amazed.

Republicans in Florida are old Democrats that changed parties even Governor Martinez was one, so if we get anything it will be a small miracle.

The Governor knows nothing will come of it, so of course he will say he would sign it.

 

[Aim1]

Unbelievable that with a super majority the Republicans don't get this passed with open and concealed carry.


I'm not an open carry proponent in most cases but there are definitely times when it can be useful so I wouldn't want to limit people's options.



Also, saying, "We can just get open carry added later" may not work because you don't know who'll be governor next year if DeSantis runs for president, he could be too preoccupied.

 

[dweis]

Constitutional carry is not something I give much thought to because in PA our Dem governor will veto any such bill and there would not be enough votes to override. Fortunately, it is not difficult to get a License to Carry Firearms here. But, this thread brought the subject to mind, and I thought which states have true Constitutional Carry. By that I mean does the apply to all persons or only to the state’s citizens, which I tend to call permit-less carry because the notion of Constitutional is that it applies to all persons in the USA. If anyone knows of a list of how different states enacted their laws please post it here. I don’t know of a list, but I am going to try to find one.

 

[dannyd]

Unbelievable that with a super majority the Republicans don't get this passed with open and concealed carry.


I'm not an open carry proponent in most cases but there are definitely times when it can be useful so I wouldn't want to limit people's options.



Also, saying, "We can just get open carry added later" may not work because you don't know who'll be governor next year if DeSantis runs for president, he could be too preoccupied.

We don't have a Super Majority of Conservatives we have a Super Majority of people with an R by their name. We are no different from any other state because large population centers control us too and they are mostly liberals unfortunately.

 

[BlueHeelerFl]

They just can't seem to get it back here in Florida. The Republicans don't have the spine for it. They need the money from big business to keep on top and they're practically owned by FRF and the big mouse.

How many open carry bills have there been? I think one got out of a subcommittee back in 2015.

I would never use open carry, but it's important.

Having open carry illegal is an absolute joke in a state with over 2 million residents with permits. And that's just the people who paid $150 to get a permit, and not the people just keep a pistol in the glovebox. That's a LOT of people walking a fine line between perfectly innocent walking from your shop or apartment to your car, and 60 days in jail. It's absolutely ridiculous.

Not to mention illegal open carry keeps non-gun people in a bubble. Last week, I heard a woman bragging her husband has a permit, like it made him special. Worse, there are people out there scared to death of anyone with a gun, not realizing they just walked passed a dozen armed citizens at the grocery store.

If open carry were legal and someone saw a tenth of what was really out there, it would make a difference.

I had to remind a woman that was ranting on a local Facebook page about was" DeSantis was doing with guns" that thousands of people in our country already had carry permits

 

[dannyd]

I had to remind a woman that was ranting on a local Facebook page about was" DeSantis was doing with guns" that thousands of people in our country already had carry permits

Sounds like my new neighbor from up North unfortunately she saw me in the parking of a local indoor range.

 

[wayneinFL]

I had to remind a woman that was ranting on a local Facebook page about was" DeSantis was doing with guns" that thousands of people in our country already had carry permits

Yeah. There are 185,000 licensees in Broward, one of the bluest counties in the state.

 

[dannyd]

We will see how far this goes.

REP. MIKE BELTRAN INTRODUCES AN OPEN CARRY AMENDMENT FOR HB-543

 

[usaral63]

And the version now states that the amendment was flawed as it was submitted. GOA claims it was improperly drawn insofar as it in effect changed a misd. to a felony.................I know no more detail, but that's the story on GOAS take on the Florida site on AR 15................guess we'll find out tomorrow as that's the hearing date.

Will note that ONLY GOA seems on top of the matter.............the NRA apparently forget to tie it's shoelaces................really makin' me re-think my life membership.

 

[dannyd]

The Three groups below have one thing in common about gun control if they fix it per the constitution once and for all they loose.

The NRA: good issue for making money.
The Republicans: good issue for getting voters.
The Democrats: good issue for getting voters.

So, things are probably never going to get better. Also take a look at the NRA's history of fighting the lawmakers about gun control laws; it's not what the members think.