General Bill by Criminal Justice Subcommittee and Williamson and Trumbull (CO-SPONSORS) Andrade; Byrd; Donalds; Drake; Hill; Roach; Sabatini; Stone; Yarborough
Safety of Religious Institutions: Authorizes church, synagogue, or other religious institution to allow concealed weapons or concealed firearms licensee to carry firearm on its property for certain purposes; specifies property owner who allows church, synagogue, or other religious institution to use his or her property may prohibit church, synagogue, or other religious institution from authorizing person to carry firearm on property
I just finished watching the live streaming and it was interesting. Let me begin with pubic participation: there were 5 people who were against the bill and one of them was the representative of Moms Demand who actually addressed the committee. More on her later.
There were two people in favor! They did not speak in front of the committee but declared their support for the bill. I am going to guess they were a couple with the last name Dubois and just thank you, thank you thank you for being there. If any of the readers know them, please extend our collective gratitude to them.
Back to Mommy Demanding: She was taken to task with what we know is their weak spot: the truth. She tried to paint how dangerous it is to carry next to kids insinuating that those allowed now by law (something that she denied it existed earlier, but was chastised for) were shooting kids accidentally all over the state, but that lasted only as long as one of the Representatives asked her to mention ones single case in Florida and she made excuses that she needed to check her laptop. She was asked by Rep Fine if she believed that people should have to Pay to Pray at their houses of worship and she was confused and said she did not think that had to do with the bill. It was not a fantastic presentation, but at least she was there with 5 others.
After the public part of the session was over, the debate began: There was one opposition to the bill and very mild, And then came Rep Fine explaining how he had seen his synagogue protected by the local Sheriff with a deputy or two and initially he thought it was a nicety from the Agency but he was told they were paying for the off-duty deputies to keep an eye around, thus it was a Pay to Pray which goes against the First Amendment. No picture of the face of the Demanding Mommy was shown.
But what really knocked me on my ass was that two Democrat Representatives came out with full force in favor of the bill. Rep Bush is a minister and Rep Daniels is a pastor of her church and If I heard Rep Bush right and I know I heard Daniels say it, both have Concealed Weapon Licenses. To make a long story short, both have dealt with funerals from gang-related activities and have their houses full of gang bangers. And as Rep Daniels said, this bill cannot be for the weekend because a church never sleeps and people live and work there all week.
The vote was taken and the bill passed if not unanimously then it was with a huge majority (there were a couple of voice votes I am not sure about).
Where is the bill headed now? No idea. I’ll keep you posted.
UPDATE: The voting was 15 Yeas, 1 Nay and 2 missed.
[…] Go read the latest update here. […]
There is an interesting dynamic going on now across the political spectrum, but with the Democrats in particular.
Let’s start out with the fact that in order to get ahead in politics, you have to obey the party leaders and toe the party line. And, since the party leaders are the one that define the party line, well…
Back to the point. We might start seeing more and more democrats break from the party line when it comes to 2nd amendment issues. Definitely not enough for gun guys to get complacent, but some. And, the reason why?
Because since Trump got elected, the party leaders have demonstrated clearly that they are a bunch of unhinged nut jobs. They have made it obvious that they are willing to screw over their constituents in order to obtain/retain power. Screw what the commons want!
Which leaves state and local legislators like Bush and Daniels wondering whether the party leadership will be leaders much longer, and weighing that against the desires of their voters. I think a lot more will start considering their re-election potential if they follow party lines, versus actually doing what their constituents want.
Only time will tell though. I am not reading too much into this.