DeSantis expects Florida lawmakers to pass 'constitutional carry' gun law in 2023

[Miami_JBT]

Everything you want for the repeal or modification of RFOs will not happen until the entire legislature is changed due to term limits. No lawmaker is going to vote for a repeal of RFOs since they voted in favor of it in the first place. That's a lawmaker admitting that they were wrong and they will never do that.

As such, the only way to make change is to make the lawmakers' lives a living hell. Public pressure is the only way forward and that's what I'm doing.

Or, in the case of ERPOs, put a couple of good court cases together and take it all the way to SCOTUS. Perhaps, with Civil Asset Forfeiture as well. I don't think the legislature will "evolve," as you describe, in the remainder of our lifetimes. Not unless we do a Jedi Mind trick on all the legislators or whatever.

At least, with ERPOs, we can do the 3rd party storage thing I mentioned above.

The legislature has evolved. For three solid years, I and others made gun rights an issue. Something a previous certain someone who was the 2A lobbyist in FL for decades did not do. We didn't coddle and stroke their egos, we publicly attacked them on the issues. We made it a campaign issue. It is an uphill fight, but progress is being made.

As for SCOTUS and RFOs. I have a gut feeling that SCOTUS is going to rule in favor of gun control on the issue of "dangerousness" of the suspect and they're going to uphold RFOs as legal. That was the basis of the oral argument with U.S. v. Rahimi.

[FfNJGTFO]

The legislature has evolved. For three solid years, I and others made gun rights an issue. Something a previous certain someone who was the 2A lobbyist in FL for decades did not do. We didn't coddle and stroke their egos, we publicly attacked them on the issues. We made it a campaign issue. It is an uphill fight, but progress is being made.

But, apparently, not as fast/soon as needed... not within our lifetimes. And I think I know who that "certain someone" was... Somebody with a name that "drives nails?"

As for SCOTUS and RFOs. I have a gut feeling that SCOTUS is going to rule in favor of gun control on the issue of "dangerousness" of the suspect and they're going to uphold RFOs as legal. That was the basis of the oral argument with U.S. v. Rahimi.

Yes, they might. As long as they rule that the ex-parte hearing part of it and the seizure (temporary or otherwise) of property as a result is unconstitutional (4th,5th and 14th). I'm not as concerned with being subject to an ERPO under a false claim. Yes, it takes time and $$$, but I know in the end, I'll be exonerated. And, if I really wanted to, I could sue the erroneous claimant for damages. The greater question for me would be, will I get all of my property back and in the same condition as when it was seized? If it's LE doing the seizing, I have my doubts.


Just out of curiosity (and if you don't mind my asking), why do you want OC as strongly as you do?

[tector]

Whenever one group of voters reflexively shows up and pulls the lever for one party, that party can take them for granted. This is true left and right. Consider the fate of American Jews. For decades, in numbers only exceeded by blacks, they were reflexively Democratic. And then they wake up one day to find out that large segments of their "fellow" Democrats don't give one shit about them. Perhaps they should have been more careful with their votes and support (obviously this does not apply to any FSN Jews, since they are very likely the exceptions to the rule, just like black 2A supporters are).

[FfNJGTFO]

@Miami_JBT - Thought you'd be interested in this (in re: ERPOs). I discovered it yesterday. What do you think?