Re: Fire Mission For Feb. 1, 2021 at FL Capitol
Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2021 1:56 pm
Exactly. The way it's written could land you in trouble if it is misinterpreted, either with LE or with the church itself. Say a church didn't have a sign saying you can't carry, you decide to carry on the school grounds and print. Church presses charges claiming "school grounds". Because the new wording doesn't explicitly grant you the ability to carry on school grounds, that would come down to the DA's interpretation to charge or not. Even if the DA sides with you, the church could go civil suit.
I'm not willing to give up the clear language of 15b, and give churches the right to bar you from carry with a posted sign (something they can't do now), in exchange for some weak language that "may" let you carry at a church school. If giving you that ability was the intention of the bill author, they half-assed it.
I suspect the point was to introduce ambiguity to snag some CWP holders into a trap by supporting this bill. Not the first time these fucks have said a bill does one thing, and it actually does the opposite. I mean, why even include the 15b change? The change wasn't necessary to implement church school carry, if that was their goal.
I'm not willing to give up the clear language of 15b, and give churches the right to bar you from carry with a posted sign (something they can't do now), in exchange for some weak language that "may" let you carry at a church school. If giving you that ability was the intention of the bill author, they half-assed it.
I suspect the point was to introduce ambiguity to snag some CWP holders into a trap by supporting this bill. Not the first time these fucks have said a bill does one thing, and it actually does the opposite. I mean, why even include the 15b change? The change wasn't necessary to implement church school carry, if that was their goal.
