Florida Democrats Vote Against Restoring Rights of Churches

By Marion Hammer

Church or State
Florida Democrats Vote Against Restoring Rights of Churches

Florida – -(Ammoland.com)- The rights of churches are enshrined in the First Amendment. They are supposed to left alone to enjoy their congregants, their property, and their freedom of choice. Yet, overwhelmingly Democrats in the Florida House and Florida Senate are continuing to vote against restoring their private property rights, their Second Amendment rights, their right to self-defense/defense of others and their right to secure their property and provide security for their congregants and guests.

Below is the report of action on pro-gun bills this week

MONDAY, January 29, 2018:

HB-39 by Rep. Dane Eagle was heard in the House Criminal Justice Sub-Committee on Monday, January 29, 2018 and PASSED by a vote of 9-4.

HB-39 is a bill to stop the abuse of law-abiding citizens who are licensed by the State to carry concealed firearms for self-defense and whose firearm becomes temporarily exposed to ordinary sight of another person.

VOTING FOR THE BILL: Committee Chairman Ross Spano (R), Representatives Thad Altman (R), Dane Eagle (R), Julio Gonzalez (R), Bill Hager (R), Gayle Harrell (R), Chris Latvala (R), Jennifer Sullivan (R), Clay Yarborough (R)

VOTING AGAINST THE BILL: Representatives Ramon Alexander (D), Sharon Pritchett (D), David Richardson (D) Emily Slosberg (D),

WEDNESDAY, January 31, 2018:

HB-55 by Rep. Frank White was heard on the Floor of the Florida House of Representatives on Wednesday, Jan. 31, 2018 and PASSED by a vote of 110-2.

HB-55 is a bill to authorize gun dealers to send background check fees (collected during the previous month) to FDLE by electronic means – rather than forcing them to mail in paper checks.

Only Reps. Evan Jenne (D) and Carlos Guillermo Smith voted AGAINST the bill.

THURSDAY, February 1, 2018:

HB-1419 by Rep. Lawrence McClure & Rep. Ross Spano was heard in the House Judiciary Committee and PASSED by a vote of 13-6

HB-1419 Guns on Church Property/Church Private Property Rights is a bill to restore private property rights to churches, synagogues, and other religious institutions. It restores the right of individual churches to decide whether or not to allow concealed firearms license holders to carry on church private property for security.

VOTING FOR THE BILL: Committee Chairman Chris Sprowls (R), Representatives Danny Burgess (R), Cord Byrd (R), Heather Fitzenhagen (R), Julio Gonzalez (R), Erin Grall (R), Shawn Harrison (R), Larry Metz (R), George Moratis (R), Daniel Perez (R), Scott Plakon (R), Ross Spano (R), Jay Trumbull (R)

VOTING AGAINST THE BILL: Representatives Ramon Alexander (D), John Cortes (D), Ben Diamond (D), Joe Geller (D), Sharon Pritchett (D), Cynthia Stafford (D)

SB-1048 by Sen. Dennis Baxley (R) was heard in the Senate Rules Committee and PASSED by a vote of 7-5.

SB-1048 Guns on Church Property/Church Private Property Rights by Sen. Dennis Baxley (R) is a bill to restore private property rights to churches, synagogues, and other religious institutions. It restores the right of individual churches to decide whether or not to allow concealed firearms license holders to carry on church private property for security.

VOTING FOR THE BILL: Committee Chairwoman Lizbeth Benacquisto (R, Senators Rob Bradley (R), Jeff Brandes (R), Anitere Flores (R), Tom Lee (R), Keith Perry (R), Wilton Simpson (R)

VOTING AGAINST THE BILL: Senators Lauren Book (D), Oscar Braynon (D), Bill Monford (D), Jose Rodriguez (D), Perry Thurston (D)

It was a great week! Thank you for your help.

Subscribe
Notify of
18 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
IndyMP
IndyMP
2 years ago

John, It really sounds like you are a lover of mass shootings. If you would check your facts. They all took place in, come on. Say it with me, ” IN GUN FREE ZONES ! ” Where they thought that no one would be able to stop them. So it really doesn’t matter what party you are with, a person that goes in to kill people that can not defend themselves is a true mark of a coward. The people that make laws that help those cowards find more and more places with unarmed people are just as guilty as… Read more »

DAVID REISNER
DAVID REISNER
2 years ago

WHO SAYS YOU CAN’T MIX CHURCH AND STATE??????? IF THE MUSLIM’S DO IT, THEN SO CAN WE.

Rick Koehler
Rick Koehler
2 years ago

Founding father’s allowed citizens to own battle ships to protect shipping.

Robert
Robert
2 years ago
Reply to  Rick Koehler

Yes, you are right. They were called Privateers and they raided enemies of our nation.They helped win the Revolutionary War for America. They sank or captured numerous British vessels.

Robert
Robert
2 years ago
Reply to  Rick Koehler

Yes, you are right. They were called Privateers and they raided enemies of our nation.They helped win the Revolutionary War for America. They sank or captured numerous British vessels.

James P Mitzel
James P Mitzel
2 years ago

Go Democrats it’s a shame were out voted by the GOP.

John
John
2 years ago

Our founding fathers never intended for anyone to carry anything but a single shot musket. Show me where concealed carry is there. Another year and more mass shootings to come…that’s a fact.

Jim
Jim
2 years ago
Reply to  John

Should we also then interpret the first amendment the same way? No radio, TV, no electronic media, only by hand set type and manually operated paper presses? Of course, then only delivered by riders on horseback or horse drawn coach. And what of the other amendments?

Graystone
Graystone
2 years ago
Reply to  John

Can you show evidence that the 2nd Amendment applies only to “single shot” firearms?
I guess I missed that when I read the amendment.

Core
Core
2 years ago
Reply to  John

You are incorrect. Our founding fathers intended everyone to have the right to bear military arms. Which was a commonly a single shot flintlock musket at the time however, the “Puckle Gun” was a flintlock “machine-gun” of its time, and there were numerous multi-shot flintlocks like “Noch’s Seven-barrelled carbine,” AKA “Sea Sweeper.” “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” I suggest you read this as it was written in the Bill of Rights within the US Constitution. (Concealed Carry is… Read more »

Tionico
Tionico
2 years ago
Reply to  John

Are you so ignorant as to be unaware of the forty round semiautomatic rifle that came into some service toward the end of the war for indempendence? Can’t remember the name of it, but I’ve seen pictures of period examples, and read reports on its use.VERY costly, which explains why every fot soldier could not have one. But OUR militiamen had trained themselves to reload and refire in about a third of a minute.. so fast the Redcoats were convinced they were up against three times what they thought they were. They tried to ban bump stocks, but were unsuccessful.… Read more »

James Higginbotham
James Higginbotham
2 years ago
Reply to  John

what part of SHALL NO BE INFRINGED DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND SLICK?
and WHERE did you come up with the founders only INTENDED WE THE PEOPLE TO CARRY ONLY A SINGLE SHOT FIREARM LOL.
our CONSTITUTION AND FIRST 10 BILLS OF RIGHTS WERE WRITTEN IN STONE, TECHNOLOGY ADVANCES, BUT THE CONSTITUTION STAYS THE SAME.

Robert
Robert
2 years ago
Reply to  John

Try telling your fairy tale to the people in Arizona Texas and just about any state that allows concealed carry. They have all enjoyed lower crime and murder rates. In the cities/states that refuse concealed carry, they have the highest murder/crime rates in the nation.

Heed the Call-up
Heed the Call-up
2 years ago
Reply to  John

The Girandoni air rifle was invented in 1780 an used by Lewis and Clark on their famous expedition. It was capable of firing 20 .46 caliber lead balls before needing a recharge, and was used by the Swiss military for over 30 years. Also as other posters stated there were many other multi-shot firearms available and used by the Patriots. Also what weapons do you believe the privateers used? Slingshots? No, they had cannons and all sorts of firearms. Our Founding Fathers not only didn’t believe the 2A was for muskets, the 2A covered all arms that a nation would… Read more »

IndyMP
IndyMP
2 years ago
Reply to  John

John, sounds like you are a lover of mass shootings. If you would like to check facts you may learn something. The majority of mass shootings happened in, come on, say it with me. ” IN GUN FREE ZONES !” You are entitled to your opinion, but not to your own facts! Regardless of the party you are part of. Politicians that make it harder for people to defend themselves are just as guilty as the coward that does the shooting. The lawsuits should be against the politicians, not the gun manufacturers. John, how about making 2018 the year you… Read more »

Armed Surprise!
Armed Surprise!
2 years ago

Interesting that a citizen layman would read and interpret the law different than scores of attorneys on both sides of the discussion. Apparently others have a different view sir!
If your interpretation were correct, why would the Democrats vite no? And get their names published here. I would think they would vote yes because it changes nothing and they get to show feaux consideration the 2nd Amendment Rights.
No sir, there is something there and people are having to show themselves for what they are – including you and I.

hippybiker
hippybiker
2 years ago

As a Florida resident who has read the law, I can tell you, church’s are not on the list of prohibited places. It’s up to the church to decide.

Pistol Pete
Pistol Pete
2 years ago

Christians have the right to protect them selves on any property especially on Church Property. Guess I will just stay out Florida on Sunday so I can go to Church safely in North Carolina