Florida: Emergency Gun Bill En Route To Governor

[Purveyor]

Updated: Apr 09, 2015 8:45 PM EST
THE CAPITAL, TALLAHASSEE, April 9, 2015 - A measure that would allow people without concealed-weapons permits to pocket their legally owned guns during a declared emergency is now headed to the governor.

The House voted 86-26 on Thursday to approve a proposal (SB 290) that would allow people to carry guns without concealed-weapons licenses for 48 hours during mandatory emergency evacuations. The bill would only apply to people who legally own guns.

A spokeswoman for Gov. Rick Scott, who prodded the Florida National Guard to back a similar measure last year, wouldn't say on Thursday if Scott would sign this year's proposal.

"If it gets to his desk he'll review it," Scott spokeswoman Jackie Schutz said.

Last year's proposal died in the Senate, amid concerns by the Florida Sheriffs Association and some Republican and Democratic senators.

more...

http://www.abc-7.com/story/28766910/emergency-gun-bill-en-route-to-governor#.VSctdZNQBFM

[Laffy Kat]

1. Oh, that's just what Fla-la-la needs.

What could go wrong?

[gejohnston]

5. other than people

being able to defend themselves from those of evil intent taking advantage of a disaster? Nothing. It is perfectly legal in most states will no effects. BTW, you are defending a Jim Crow era law. Open carry was banned because some white people didn't like AA farm workers open carrying.
https://casetext.com/case/watson-v-stone
http://inthesetimes.com/article/3857/talking_about_guns_fighting_about_race

People who decide to rape, rob, or whatever are not going to be deterred by something as trivial as a carry law.

[Laffy Kat]

8. So I'm a racist? nt

[blueridge3210]

9. Not necessarily.

You are endorsing the same policy, however.

[stone space]

15. Being called a "racist" by a Zimmerman supporter is no insult. (nt)

[gejohnston]

23. Of course not.

I'm saying a couple of different things.
1) Since it is legal in most states, there is no evidence of shoot outs between otherwise law abiding people, so the law isn't needed.

2) Good, bad, and indifferent people can support the same thing for different reasons. For example, I'm guessing you would support the ban today with the best of intentions. Different factions of good people can also support something for different reasons. Of course, bad people can be great at selling bad ideas to the well meaning.

[Straw Man]

7. So ...

Oh, that's just what Fla-la-la needs.

What could go wrong?

... you are of the opinion that in times of emergency, it would be better to have guns fall into the hands of looters than to allow their rightful owners to remove them to a place of safety?

I'm curious as to why you think that way.

[Laffy Kat]

10. I don't believe that property is worth a human life.

And all the "looters" who will be killed while the "victims" are moving their firearms to a place of safety, well I guess it will be their words against. . . oh, wait.

[gejohnston]

13. it isn't the stuff

but if the looters decide that the owners of the stuff are easy prey for other reasons? You know, heat of the moment, all of that.

[Straw Man]

14. I don't think you understand.

I don't believe that property is worth a human life.

And all the "looters" who will be killed while the "victims" are moving their firearms to a place of safety, well I guess it will be their words against. . . oh, wait.

Let's try this again. You are suggesting that arming criminals -- by leaving guns behind for them to loot -- is less dangerous than allowing the legal owners of those guns to transport them.

You are also suggesting that gun owners will engage in widespread and random murder if allowed to carry their guns outside the home.

I find those viewpoints very odd.

[Laffy Kat]

25. "Let's try this again"....

And I find YOU quite condescending.

[Straw Man]

27. Don't want to discuss the issue?

"Let's try this again"....

And I find YOU quite condescending.

Well, THAT'S going to keep me up at night ... Nevertheless, it's quite irrelevant.

[Politicalboi]

2. That way when there's a disaster

More people can pick and choose the "survivors" and the "looters". What could go wrong? I'm sure Gov BatBoy will sign it.

[gejohnston]

4. looters will ignore the law

so will those of evil intent who
BTW, the law banning open carry (and concealed carry for that manner) in Florida is actually a Jim Crow law passed in 1893 because African American farm workers often open carried.
https://casetext.com/case/watson-v-stone
http://inthesetimes.com/article/3857/talking_about_guns_fighting_about_race

Are you saying people shouldn't have the right to defend yourself?

[stone space]

22. One person's looter is another person's finder.

looters will ignore the law

[ileus]

3. Finally someone who realizes an emergency isn't the time to be disarmed.

Right when you're the most vulnerable folks want to make you an easier victim. Is that supposed to be some kind of emergency plan???

[Laffy Kat]

11. "Emergencies" are happending every day.

Just ask our police. They keep having to protect themselves in all kind of "emergencies" lately.

[ileus]

12. Exactly if cops are having to fight for their lives every day now, Imagine how bad it will be for us

during an emergency situation.

[Eleanors38]

6. If a post-disaster area is threatened by robbers & looters, I doubt a state attorney will

pursue charges (or a jury will convict) anyone who carries a gun for self-protection. This would seem to codify these (in)actions.

[stone space]

17. Would that apply to just looters, or would it apply to finders as well?

[Eleanors38]

18. If anyone attacks another, let the courts decide.

[stone space]

19. In any emergency, unleash the gunz, and let the courts sort out...

...the looters from the finders after the fact?

[Eleanors38]

20. you prefer before the fact?

SCIENCE!

[stone space]

21. I prefer not to unleash the gunz on looters and finders before the fact. (nt)

[Straw Man]

24. No, actually ...

I prefer not to unleash the gunz on looters and finders before the fact.

... what you are proposing is to arm the looters. Is that what you really want?

Nobody seems to understand the purpose of this law. Its primary purpose is to allow gun owners to evacuate with their guns, rather than leaving them behind for "finders."

[stone space]

16. Because everybody knows that the only solution to any emergency is MOAR GUNZ! (nt)

[liberal N proud]

26. What could possibly go wrong?

Wild, wild west, oh, I mean Florida!

[gejohnston]

28. Except that

The "wild west" was never that wild. Tom Mix and Clint Eastwood movies were not documentaries. Even back then, the cities on the coasts still had their sleazy underside complete with gangs. BTW, small pistols like the Remington Derringer was marketed to middle class urban women. Hand muffs often had built in holsters.

http://www.unpopulartruth.com/2009/04/myths-of-old-west.html

[NYC_SKP]

29. What happened to the USA that a woman calls 911 "there are six men carrying six large guns"....

As if there's a freaking crime in progress???

This is how the gun control zealots want to win this thing, instill unreasonable fear into otherwise sane citizens.

Sheesh.