I was asked to write something ‘happy’ for today so here goes. The Gunshine State’s Senate has actually passed a gun law which regulates guns. Now you might think this is no big deal because the new law, as written (but not yet approved) puts no new rules on the ownership of black guns (not a racial term, it’s what we call assault rifles in the gun business) but several parts of the law are significant in terms of the potential impact on violence caused by guns.
More important, this is the first time since the last Ice Age that Florida has been in the forefront of what appears to be a national movement to tighten at least some gun restrictions, which is a complete turnaround since this state has always been a laboratory to test laws which will make it easier for everyone to exercise their 2nd-Amendment ‘rights.’ Florida was an early state to move from ‘may’ issue of concealed-carry permits to ‘shall’ issue; it was also the first state to pass a ‘stand your ground’ law, and it tried, ultimately unsuccessfully, to criminalize doctors who talked to patients about guns.
Not only does Florida lead the nation in developing pro-gun laws, it probably is also the state whose legislators file some of the dumbest and craziest gun laws that simply can’t be true. But they are true. I’m talking about a bill drafted by State Senator Greg Steube which makes the owner of a public space liable for damages if he declares his property to be a ‘gun free zone,’ and then a customer is shot because he couldn’t respond to an armed threat with his gun.
This law assumes, of course, that if an armed customer was confronted by a threat he would be able to protect himself from getting shot by dint of the fact that he had a gun on his person. Well, since we have a President who pretends to believe the same thing, why should we be surprised when a State Senator in Florida believes the same thing? The good news is that Steube’s bill is still sitting in the statehouse trash somewhere, but the fact that he could even dream up such a stupid idea gives you a hint as to why I am surprised that Florida may actually pass any kind of gun-control measure at all.
The new Florida statute contains language which increases the minimum age for long gun purchases from 18 to 21. It also extends the state’s three-day waiting period for handgun purchases to all guns, bump stocks are banned, and in a compromise, it allows school districts to arm certain individuals who are present in schools but does not authorize arming teachers because Governor Scott made it clear that he would oppose any such move.
Gun-control activists in Florida and elsewhere wanted much more; a ban on assault weapons as a start. But I’m not sure that this bill should be seen by my gun violence prevention (GVP) friends as a loss, and I’ll tell you why.
First and most important, if Florida legislators are willing to split away from the NRA on even the slightest grounds, this makes it easier for office-holders in states that have not been as subservient to America’s first civil-rights organization to do the same thing or more. Second and perhaps equally important is that the debate in Tallahassee on an assault weapons ban was notable for the fact that opponents of the measure didn’t try to convince anyone that an AR-15 was no different from any other ‘modern sporting rifle.’ That cockamamie idea, right out of the gun industry’s playbook, was decidedly left unsaid.
We will surely see more state-level gun debates in the weeks ahead, and I’m willing to bet that in some other reluctant state legislature somebody will stand up and say, “If they could pass a gun-control bill in Florida, why can’t we pass one here?” That’s a question are which has never been asked before.
Mar 06, 2018 @ 18:16:39
2a not touched because keep and bear doesn’t mean buy and sell, original meaning fans.
Mar 06, 2018 @ 20:10:45
With 231 amendments to the bill and now with it in the House, don’t count the chickens until the fat lady sings.
Mar 06, 2018 @ 20:32:09
That’s an ugly mixed metaphor, Alan.
Mar 06, 2018 @ 22:36:08
The mixed metaphor may be ugly, but the fat lady is not bad looking.
Mar 06, 2018 @ 20:45:30
The important thing was the legislature was willing to buck the NRA. The question I have is whether the Legislature will pass something more than symbolic.
Rand Corp. just did a review of all the literature written on gun control measures. Most of what the Rand Corp said regarding what we know about the effectiveness of gun laws was “meh”. I’m not surprised and think we need to do better.
I had a couple beers an hour ago with a former county councilor up here who quit the GOP on general principles, and who also had a bad run-in with the NRA regional representative. He is a former army chopper pilot, current medivac pilot, and doesn’t shrink from a challenge. As a former army guy, he wonders why anyone with a credit card should be able to walk out of a gun shop with an AR but said he really freaked out the NRA rep by asking that question.
So it goes.
Mar 06, 2018 @ 23:30:35
With all due respect, any republican, democrat, independent or any other party who is elected to the legislature can introduce a bill. How is that bucking the NRA? I agree, passing Legislation is something much different than just introducing it.