The bill picked up several sponsors, but not yet a companion in the House. Truthfully I am not happy with this bill and I have it tagged as Bad Bill for the reasons I express in the letter sent to Senator Gruters and the co-sponsors.
Hoping I did not screw the pooch too much, but here is what I wrote.
Regarding you proposed bill SB 498 – Safety of Religious Institutions, I would like to suggest a couple of ideas.
First, when it says “a posted policy” I might be wrong, but it reads as if there has to be signage prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons in church and I see a couple of problems.
First, the requirement of non-specified signs regarding size, location and language can cause unintended “traps” for those legally carrying. Also it would be a “camel’s nose under the tent” opportunity for other locations to demand the same which may lead down the road to a reduction where law-abiding Floridians could carry. I believe that keeping it simple and just allowing to carry in all places of worship would be enough.
But if the signage is a must, I would earnestly suggest to change the penalty from a a second degree misdemeanor to a Non-Criminal Violation in the form of a fine not to exceed $200. A second degree misdemeanor is still a too powerful temptation for some to abuse power on what could be a simple mistake on the part of the person carrying a concealed weapon and unfortunately, some prosecutors run away from the pack and may use the statute for less than noble intention as we have seen in the past, thankfully just in uncommon exceptions. After several decades of statistics, Floridians with Concealed Weapons’ Permits are one of the most (if not the most) law abiding citizens of the state. Since its inception, less than half of one percent of all licenses issued have been revoked by any cause or crime and we should not be penalized for simply trying to stay safe while professing our faith.
Thank you for taking the time to read my ideas and I hope they provide a measure of help.
Good luck and God Bless.
Miguel Gonzalez.
Feel free to copy the idea (not copy/paste, you lazy bastards! 🙂 ) and I plan on writing my representative later tonight or tomorrow first thing to see about a companion bill.
I’ll be going over other bills as the week progresses. Join the fun!
Does the bill still have the flaw in which a school attached to a church (or a church attached to a school, or a facility used as a school on weekdays but where a church meets on Sundays) is governed by a different, harsher set of rules — or worse yet, multiple sets of overlapping rules?
I am going to be very careful on this, but my IANAL guess is that school is no longer an issue because of the intro:
“Notwithstanding any other law,”
Again, that is my guess and not necessarily the reality
What does the bill actually do? If it’s aimed at restricting carry in churches, I think the Boomer with a Big Iron on his Hip from last year is enough proof that we don’t need anything like that.
As the law stands today, you are allowed to carry in Church, no problem. The issue is when a church is sharing property with a school which is no uncommon, then you are forbidden to carry as the School GFZ law takes over. As Catholic, I am pretty much screwed because it is rare to find a church without a school attached to it. The closest Catholic church without a school is 12 miles away. The closest one is about 2 miles but it does have a school and if I want to attend, I have to leave my sidearm home.