Will Florida’s Real Anti-Liberty Villain Please Stand Up?

© 2016 by Phillip Evans

Governor Rick Scott
Governor Rick Scott
AmmoLand Gun News
AmmoLand Gun News

Georgia –  -(Ammoland.com)- If you're as old as I am, you remember that delightful game show, “To Tell The Truth“, that can still be seen on cable TV, where three players tried to fool the celebrity panel as to which one was the genuine expert in a particular field, and who were the imposters.

The imposters were allowed to lie, but the expert could not. It was great fun, and I still love those old black and white episodes with Kitty Carlisle, Bill Cullen, and others of that era.

There is another show being played out in Florida with regard to who is behind derailing the restoration of our human right of self-defense, and the three contestants are all Republicans.

Rights Denied

The right of licensed citizens to openly carry a holstered pistol in public (with a few exceptions such as while hunting, fishing or camping) was stripped away in 1987, orchestrated by Clinton Democrat Janet Reno of Waco fame or infamy, depending on your point of view.

Adult college students 21 and over who are licensed to carry a firearm have never had their Second Amendment Right to bear arms on a college campus in Florida recognized. It has always been infringed by Florida politicians who enjoy in their immediate vicinity armed protection, but who claim that campus police scattered about here and there is fine and dandy for you, and would have you wait until police can either rescue you or draw a chalk line around your body.

But politicians are special, being servants of the people, so their lives get the premium protection, while you get “good enough”.

If college students had the same high level of protection as state politicians, then perhaps we can talk about why it might not be so bad to keep licensed adults on campus disarmed – although even in that case, a right is still a right, regardless of how much some may believe we need it.

Remember the Bill of Rights? It's not called the “Bill of Needs“, and for good reason.

And Today's Contestants Are…

Senate Judiciary Chairman Miguel Diaz de la Portilla
Senate Judiciary Chairman Miguel Diaz de la Portilla

Who are the three players in Florida? From the top down, they are: Governor Rick Scott, Senate President Andy Gardiner, and Senate Judiciary Chairman Miguel Diaz de la Portilla.

One would think that with a Republican majority in the Florida Senate, things would be moving along pretty well in the rights restoration department.

However, open carry failed to pass in 2011 when SB-234 and HB-517 were amended on the Senate floor to remove the open carry provision, and campus carry failed to pass last year.

For two years in a row, Senator Diaz de la Portilla has refused to allow campus carry to have a full vote on the Senate floor.

And now he is saying that the Open Carry bill is on “life support”, meaning there is a slim to none chance of it receiving a full vote.

How ironic and thoughtful of him to use that phrase to describe the chances of SB 300, a bill that would help deter crime and save lives!

Just Following Orders

Let's assume for a moment that this is not by his choice, that he is following orders from his boss, Senate President Gardiner. At best then, he favors his position more than our rights, and at worst, he actually desires to keep citizens defenseless on college campuses, and to prevent us from openly carrying elsewhere in public, in a free-speech exercise of our Second Amendment Rights, and in the manner we decide best to carry for the protection of ourselves and our families.

Senate President Andy Gardiner could send both bills to the Senate floor for a vote on his own. He has that authority. His only excuse would be pressure from Governor Scott to not do that. So, same situation. Does Senator Gardiner have some reward in mind more important to him than our rights, or does he just simply hate the idea of restoring them?

Now we come to Governor Scott. Has he publicly advocated for bills he wants to see passed? Of course he has, and has taken credit for “working with the legislature” to get it done.

When first asked about the Open Carry and Campus Carry bills, was his response a resounding, “Yes!“? No, it was the whimper, “I haven't seen the bills”.

Well Governor, have you seen them yet? I have spoken with someone at his office on the phone, who explained to me that the Governor is letting the bills “go through the legislative process“. In other words, the Governor is content to let the bills die once again in committee. He is content to not work with the legislature in this case. Why?

Perhaps Gov. Scott is just too busy to bother with trivial matters such as the safety and rights of his citizens?

And The Winner Is…

If Florida's Governor truly advocated for our rights, he would find his voice and use it. He would exercise the prerogative of his office to be a leader and stand on principle. Does he honor our rights? His inaction to speak a word on our behalf speaks louder than the words he uses to claim he supports the Second Amendment.

On the television show mentioned earlier, there could be only one correct choice. Who is the winner among the three Florida players? It would seem they all are. They have all effectively fooled the voters to believe that they stood for freedom.

About Phillip Evans

The author is a self-defense rights advocate and member of the NRA, GeorgiaCarry.org, and FloridaCarry.org, and posts at PursuitOfPatriotism.Blogspot.com.

  • 4 thoughts on “Will Florida’s Real Anti-Liberty Villain Please Stand Up?

    1. SAD, isn’t it; how betrayed we are by the very people elected to represent us and safeguaurd against any tresspesses on our enumorated Constitutional Rights, It really highlights how brilliant the framers were in their warning to us about the challenges we would face in protecting our freedoms and liberties from enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC.

    2. I am filing an ethics complaint against Portilla tomorrow morning. It part, it reads, ”
      Senator Dela Portilla, has purposely and intentionally used his position as Chairman of the Judiciary Council to block legislation “SB 68: Licenses to Carry Concealed Weapons or Firearms” and/or “SB163 Weapons and Firearms,” and “SB300 Weapons and Firearms,” in violation of F.S. 112.313(6) “MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION.—No public officer, employee of an agency, or local government attorney shall corruptly use or attempt to use his or her official position or any property or resource which may be within his or her trust, or perform his or her official duties, to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for himself, herself, or others….” and
      Senate Rule 1.38 Undue influence, in that, “A Senator shall not use his or her influence as a Senator in any issue that involves substantial conflict between his or her personal interest and his or her duties in the public interest.
      Mister Portilla has decided that he will not allow a bill that is expected to pass, which he personally does not want to become law, to be heard in committee or pass his station. He is assuming a power that he does not possess, and misusing his official position as the Chair of the Judiciairy Committee to issue an unconstitutional and illegal veto.
      Under 112.313(6) “MISUSE OF PUBLIC POSITION, Mister Portilla has stated publically that he will not allow the bill to be heard for purely personal reasons, and that he fears that the bill will pass the legislature and become law. He is securing for himself the censorship of every gun owner in the state, the right to carry and display their weapons. He has declared that he will not support legislation that will allow open carry, or college carry, because he does not like the legislation personally, and will not allow it to become law. This is a power he does not possess, and violates the abuse of powers clause of 112.313(6) by securing a special benefit (personal veto power to prevent Open Carry) for himself.

      Mister Portilla has violated Senate Rule 1.38 Undue influence, in that, “A Senator shall not use his or her influence as a Senator in any issue that involves substantial conflict between his or her personal interest and his or her duties in the public interest.
      He is clearly against Open Carry/College Carry, and he is using his position as a Senator and Chair of the Judiciary Committee to influence the passage of a bill that is expected to pass, by preventing the bill from reaching the full Senate, or even his own committee members. He has a clear conflict of interest, and is using his position to influence public policy and prevent legislation that is wanted, needed and desired from reaching the Senate Floor. He is not seeking the Public Interest, or he would allow the Public to reach their legislators. He is seeking only his own private interest.
      I have standing in that I would directly benefit from the additional free speech afforded were open carry to be passed, and that I have purposely refrained from attending college due in major part to not being able to be armed while on campus. His personally motivated action in this matter directly affects me and my personal liberties.

      CBS Local reported, on Feb 9th, Mister Portilla said, “I am concerned that it may become a vehicle for some very, very bad amendments. I think that’s what we learned last week,” Diaz de la Portilla said. “Because of those concerns, I’m very, very seriously considering not hearing it at all.”
      The Ginesville Sun reported on Feb 10th, “It’s not looking really good for open carry unless some agreement surfaces that provides for some safeguards that you don’t have a Wild Wild West situation with people walking down the streets of, say Miracle Mile or International Dive or Brickell, like they are walking to the O.K. Corral,” Diaz de la Portilla said.
      “Absent some last-minute agreement on some language that takes (concealed weapons in the Legislature) off the table and absent of assurance that the bill won’t become a vehicle for all kinds of other things we saw in the House…..it’s probably not going to move forward.” Diaz de la Portilla said.
      It is clear from his own statements that he opposes open carry, and is using his position as a vehicle to short-change the legislative process to prevent a bill he does not agree with from reaching our Representatives. He is effectively issuing a personal veto of the legislation, one that does not have safeguards and is not a power granted him in any way in the Florida Constitution, law, or the Rules of the Senate or even his own committee rules.

      I HIGHLY recommend that as many people as possible file the same complaint. You can find the form at http://www.ethics.state.fl.us/Documents/Forms/ComplaintFAQ.pdf

    3. Im with you 100 percent no votes . for im handicaped and cant run need to protect my family and our home .

    Comments are closed.