Gun Rights Win in Florida: State Law Will Soon End

Gun Rights Win in Florida: State Law Will Soon End Local Firearms Restrictions


Florida has decided to finally protect the 2nd Amendment at the state level and eliminate onerous restrictions that many municipalities and communities have enacted against gun rights.

Starting October 1st, any public official who passes or enforces gun regulations below the state level faces a $5,000 personal fine and could even be removed from office by the governor for enacting or enforcing local gun laws.

While Florida has had a law on its books since 1987 that makes it illegal to pass gun regulations beyond state statutes, there was no enforcement mechanism in place. As a result, towns and cities have created ordinances at will. In the process, many of them have criminalized otherwise completely law-abiding citizens who unintentionally ran afoul of arbitrary, localized gun rules.

But thanks to the law recently signed by Governor Rick Scott, that’s all about to change in the Sunshine State.

Called the Penalties for Violating Firearms Preemption Law, the new state forces the repeal of any and all regulations, policies, and ordinances that violate the firearms preemption law of 1987. Its passage has already had an impact as assorted town and county bureaucrats are scrambling to come into compliance by the October 1 deadline. The Orlando Sentinel reported on the changes now underway that:

“Orange County employees have started removing ‘no firearms’ signs at county parks, and soon they’ll probably black out the same words on brochures. In Groveland, leaders recently erased from the books an ordinance that banned firing a gun into the air….in Boca Raton, the “no guns allowed” sign has come down at City Hall. In Lake County, commissioners recently deleted a provision in an ordinance that would have banned firearms on public lands, including its parks.”

What is certain is this- Governor Rick Scott has sent a clear message that the right to bear arms enshrined in the 2nd amendment to the Constitution is not a parking regulation or a picnic permit to be issued, denied, or changed at the whim of any middling bureaucrat.

On top of that, the 6000% increase in aluminum baseball bat sales in the U.K. this week due to the shocking riots there may have refocused Floridians on their right to protect their persons and property as enshrined in our Bill of Rights,

[ItalianScallion (Premo)]

What does that make; 40 RTC states? Only 10 to go (17 according to Obama). I'm sure Maryland won't be far behind

[glhs837]

OMFG!!!!! The bloodbath is coming, everybody get your waders on!!!!!! Cause you know every time FL opens up gun laws, people get gunned down in the streets!!!!!



Wait, that hasn't happened? It must have, because the Brady people couldnt be wrong, could they? Could it be that the average citizen isn't just one available trigger from killing anyone who takes his parking spot? Nah, they couldnt be that wrong could they?

[DEEKAYPEE8569]

Originally Posted by ItalianScallion

What does that make; 40 RTC states? Only 10 to go (17 according to Obama). I'm sure Maryland won't be far behind

I'm not holding MY breath.

[Lurk]

Originally Posted by ItalianScallion

What does that make; 40 RTC states? Only 10 to go (17 according to Obama). I'm sure Maryland won't be far behind

Wasn't Florida a Right to Carry state before this law? Sounds like this law just attaches penalties for preventing RTC by localities.

[ItalianScallion (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Lurk

Wasn't Florida a Right to Carry state before this law? Sounds like this law just attaches penalties for preventing RTC by localities.

"...towns and cities have created ordinances at will. In the process, many of them have criminalized otherwise completely law-abiding citizens who unintentionally ran afoul of arbitrary, localized gun rules..."

Doesn't sound like a true RTC state to me.

[dustin]

Originally Posted by ItalianScallion

"...towns and cities have created ordinances at will. In the process, many of them have criminalized otherwise completely law-abiding citizens who unintentionally ran afoul of arbitrary, localized gun rules..."

Doesn't sound like a true RTC state to me.

Define Right To Carry.

Shall Issue with unregulated open carry in any public place?

North Carolina is a shall issue and it was a PITA for me to get my CCW from there.

[ItalianScallion (Premo)]

Originally Posted by dustin

Define Right To Carry.
Shall Issue with unregulated open carry in any public place?
North Carolina is a shall issue and it was a PITA for me to get my CCW from there.

IMO, RTC means that anyone with a "clean" background should be able to carry a handgun. I'm ok with a background check, btw, and I'm also in favor of there being a minimum age requirement (I'm thinking 25 or older). I am NOT ok with having to get a permit to carry a gun. If a person's background check comes back "clean", there should be no one who is able to deny their Constitutional RTC.

As far as "unregulated carry in any public place", why not? It depends on the establishment that you're going in to. If a particular joint says NO guns, then NO GUNS! You also have to remember that MOST people won't carry a gun, ever. Most of those who have been cleared to carry, are going to be responsible with them.

[Pushrod]

Originally Posted by ItalianScallion

IMO, RTC means that anyone with a "clean" background should be able to carry a handgun. I'm ok with a background check, btw, and I'm also in favor of there being a minimum age requirement (I'm thinking 25 or older). I am NOT ok with having to get a permit to carry a gun. If a person's background check comes back "clean", there should be no one who is able to deny their Constitutional RTC.

As far as "unregulated carry in any public place", why not? It depends on the establishment that you're going in to. If a particular joint says NO guns, then NO GUNS! You also have to remember that MOST people won't carry a gun, ever. Most of those who have been cleared to carry, are going to be responsible with them.

That would be a slap in the face for all our brave boys and girls overseas fighting to preserve freedom!

[Merlin99 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by ItalianScallion

IMO, RTC means that anyone with a "clean" background should be able to carry a handgun. I'm ok with a background check, btw, and I'm also in favor of there being a minimum age requirement (I'm thinking 25 or older). I am NOT ok with having to get a permit to carry a gun. If a person's background check comes back "clean", there should be no one who is able to deny their Constitutional RTC.

As far as "unregulated carry in any public place", why not? It depends on the establishment that you're going in to. If a particular joint says NO guns, then NO GUNS! You also have to remember that MOST people won't carry a gun, ever. Most of those who have been cleared to carry, are going to be responsible with them.

Why does the age that someone is supposedly responsible keep moving? 18, 21, now 25, is it taking longer for them to mature. I personally think if you can carry a loaded weapon for the government at 18, there's no reason in the world you shouldn't be able to carry one for yourself at the same age.