'Guns' passes Senate, Crist likely to sign

The guns-to-work legislation just passed the Senate 26-13. One Democrat, Sen. Mandy Dawson, voted with Republicans.

"They did the right thing. The people of this state deserve to have their rights protected, and that what was done today," said NRA lobbyist Marion Hammer, who watched the vote with former Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala. Gun rights advocates pushed the bill for three sessions.

The legislation (HB 503) prohibits businesses from barring employees who have concealed weapons permits from brining their guns to work and leaving them locked in a car. The measure has already passed the House, and now heads to Gov. Charlie Crist.

Crist indicated yesterday he is inclined to sign the bill. "I haven't made a final decision, but the Second Amendment is pretty important. It's the secone one," he told the Times. He said he was not moved by the claims of opponents that the bill tramples over private property rights. "Some are trying to make that juxtaposition," he said.

David Daniel, chief lobbyist for the Florida Chamber of Commerce, said business will urge Crist to veto the bill. But, acknowledging the odds, he also said a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a law is "inevitable." Last year, a federal judge overturned a similar law in Oklahoma.

"Even in its watered down form, this bill still steals private property rights away from Floridians," Daniel said. "What gets lost in this debate is we used to stand with the NRA and fight big government telling us what we we're to do. It's odd."

Comments

I am shocked that he even knows how to use a word like "juxtaposition".
Go back to your photo ops, chuck, that is all you are good for.

Who ever is writing the book on Cristism - please make this the second one - Crist indicated yesterday that he is inclined to sign the bill. "I haven't made a final decision, but the Second Amendment is pretty important. It's the secone one,"

"I haven't made a final decision, but the Second Amendment is pretty important. It's the secone one."

Uh, thanks Cristi for telling us that the Second Amendment is the 2nd one. I didn't know that.

Now, get back to planning your summer wedding with Ms. Rome.

[Hattori Hanzo]

Monday is a pretty important day of the week.

[H.L.Menchen]

Hey, what do you expect from a Republican?

[Chris Boscarino]

He was stating an obvious to make a point; he is for this bill. Saying that the amendment is the second one is like saying "I don't want to kill a man, he might die" giving you the speaking party's intentions with a silent, unspoken "Duhhh" at the end. :) This might be over the heads of simple minded sheep that the most of you are. :x

[THE PEOPLE!]

STOP DIVERTING ATTENTION AWAY FROM YOUR LIES AND FAILURES, AND FIX PROPERTY INSURANCE LIKE YOU PROMISED.

[patrick]

Fix propert taxes too. Oh yeah thats right you did with Amendment 1. What a joke!

[4th and 5th Amendments]

we want to renegotiate our contracts...

This anti-business bill would have never passed on Frank Ryll's watch.

[Tony]

Score one for the libertarians, those of you who think this is anti-business do not have a clue. If I were to become a violent crime victim on your business property because I could not defend myself due to your exception to having my weapon in my car, guesss who I would sue into bankruptcy? If you take away my ability to defend myself, you had better provide for my security.

[jack]

Does the law contain a provision if I am harmed by a third person by your gun because you left it in your car unlocked that I can then sue the heck out of you for negligence? Sounds fair to me. Welcome to FloriDUH!

I cannot believe that we have a Governor who makes comments on policy like this. That is absolutely ridiculous. "It is the Second One" ?!?!

Charlie is scared of Marion Hammer, so he'll pass it.

[JJ]

This will be a great law if it results in more people getting the firearm training required to get their concealed weapons permit.

[Tony]

Sure Jack, if someone is dumb enough to leave their gun in their unlocked car, I think they should share some of the responsibility for any negative consequences.

Now all you have to do is petition the government to get such a law on the books. Personally I'm not worried, since I can protect myself from the idiot with the gun stolen from the unlocked car. (like that happens in significant numbers)

Anymore silly "what if" scenarios Jack?

[Annie Oakley]

Since when is firearm training required to get a CCW? I purchased mine over breakfast.

[Dr_Dug]

This will certainly put MORE guns on the street. If people know you have a gun in your car...you better lock it good! And try NOT to use it on the way home during traffic!!
This is a tricky area...because guns don't belong everywhere just because your allowed to carry them!

[Steve]

Why is it when it comes to cigarette smoking, we understand that it's an individual right to choose to do harm to oneself but it does not to give you the right to harm others -- so we have "clean indoor air" laws. So yes, you may, arguably have a right to carry a concealed weapon, but what about my right to be safe FROM guns at work and anywhere else? Canada has more guns per capita than the US but has fewer gun incidents and fatalities. It's the society of the fear-mongering gun rights activists that beat the drum of paranoia and act in the name of law-abiding citizens. I'm a law-abiding citizen so please quit speaking in the name of my protection. You have no right to do so. Children are shot dead with guns, legally and illegally owned and the gun rights activist sit there and say, "those weren't law abiding citizens" or "we need more firearms education." And not one child is resurrected from the dead once the legality of the gun ownership is established. I say let's teach firearms education in every public school in Florida but teach it as "abstinence only". Works for me!

Sound like some sore loser liberals on the blog this AM!!

[Tony]

So Steve, how many people were killed by a person using a gun versus a person using a car last year? Why not ban cars?

People are stabbed to death, why no law against keeping a knife in my car on your business property?

Same old tired rhetoric by anti-gunners. A gun is a tool, it is inanimate, it cannot do anything by itself. Guns kill people just like pencils make spelling mistakes, how would you correct those spelling mistakes? By banning pencils?

You do not have a "right" to be "safe" from guns in the workplace, can you show where this is in the Bill of Rights? Besides which, I challenge you to show documentation of one single case where a person was accosted by a gun? I do however have the right to keep and bear arms and this is a right I was born with, it cannot be granted just as the freedom of speech cannot be granted.

[Dr_Dug]

Steve has a point. The right to carry WEAPONS and the right to be safe from guns is a fine line. Basically what that means is does someone have the right to know that guns are present(which could create a situation) or does someone have the right to HIDE thier weapons for personal safety? The big question is....what happens if they use the gun? Standing near a shootout unarmed only creates more victims. Like I said..it's a fine line!

You are so right 11:43 a.m., because we all know how liberal the chambers of commerce are, right?

All I have to say is if anyone brings a gun onto my property against my specific instructions not to bring one that they better be ready to use it. I won't need a weapon to exact my pound of flesh.

He said it was the second one to signify its importance.

[Dale]

If the gun manufacturers lobby, better known as the NRA, has their way, every person in Florida will be carrying a weapon at all times, just like the old west of the movies.
Except that we have better weapons today.
Whats next, will the Florida legislature cave in to the horse and hat lobby and decree that we all ride horses and wear Stetsons?
We need better lawmakers in Tallahassee.
I'll bet if this were on a ballot most Floridians would vote against it.

The saddest part about all of this is that - passing or not - will it really make one bit of difference either way, otherr than the time and money wasted on even having the fight in the first place?

[Dr_Dug]

Tony..your an idiot. You stated... "You do not have a "right" to be "safe" from guns in the workplace,can you show where this is in the Bill of Rights?."
Easy answer.....IT IS IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS. It starts with...LIFE,LIBERTY..and the pursuit of happiness.
According to you Tony...we could all carry Guns, Bombs and Anthrax..because they don't kill...people do. What an IDIOT.

[JJ]

Annie Oakley, I can tell you don't have a CCW permit in FL, because if you did, you'd know that FL law requires training, fingerprinting, photographing, and a background check.

[jack]

Tony: It's significant if it happens to YOU but not to others I assume?

[Shre shot]

What in the world has this State come too? I have a question. Does this mean that teachers can bring their guns to school? I hope it does because they can shoot all the sex offenders while on campus and save the State some money on the prosecution of these creeps. At least this will lower the number of unionized teachers in the State. Stand back while I whip this out. Does anyone know where to buy 40 calibre hollow points because I have to speak with my boss when this great piece of legislation passes?

[Dr_Dug]

JJ..how does training, fingerprinting, photographing, and a background checks stop the mis-use of guns? If you did some homework, you wouldn't make such stupid comments.

[jack]

Oh, I forgot to add: "Welcome to FloriDUH" ranked currently in the bottom 5 of states in regard to quality of life issues. The state is a sad joke. What y'all need to do is get rid of those "cut taxes and spend" Republicans!

[Dr_Dug]

Shre shot... you have a point! Could you imagine telling your Boss.."I carry a gun to work everyday just in case..."
I'll have to get myself a 50 shot shotgun street-sweeper...and of course I'll get training, fingerprinting, photographing, and a background checks.. then a loaded gun. Yippe-Kie-Yea Motherfu--er.

[JJ]

Dr_Dug, I never said this law would stop the misuse of guns. You can't pass a law against people's stupidity. If you did your homework you'd know that the crime rate of people licensed for concealed carry is 1/100th that of the general population. Nobody is forcing you to get trained, licensed etc. Just go on with your life every day thinking a police officer will be standing next to you when you need one. Best of luck.

[Dr_Dug]

Jack..if its sooooo sad here in Florida,then why don't you just leave? Maybe Florida is so sad because people like you live here and complain without fixing the problem. In fact..I'm sure if I saw who you voted for and YOUR background....you would be part of the problem too!

[Dr_Dug]

JJ..yes you can! You CAN pass a law against people's stupidity. DON"T LET THEM HAVE THE GUNS TO BE STUPID WITH!!! And according to FBI stats...legal guns OFTEN get into the hands of crimminals. How do YOU think they get the guns to commit crimes?

[jack]

I did leave. . .2 yrs. ago and shook the dust off at the Georgia border. Never to return. Now in God's country, North Carolina. I didn't vote for the "cut taxes and spend" REPUBLICAN,i.e, somewhere in Texas there's a village missing an idiot Dubya.

[Appalled]

I don't know where to start with my utter disgust with this bill. First, the second amendment was intended to keep the government from imposing it's will on the common citizen and to create a militia for the purposes of protecting our country. However, the NRA beats this amendment like a drum for the real purpose of selling more guns, gaining a larger membership, and obtaining even more lobbying power. As for protecting yourself in a parking lot, if attacked, the likelyhood is that you would be getting into your car and not have access to your gun. As a result, if not armed already, you would probably wind up helping to supply a gun to someone who shouldn't have it. Finally, in general, it is far more likely that your gun will hurt someone you know, directly or indirectly, rather than be used to protect yourself.

[Dr_Dug]

JJ..for the sake of arguement..I own several guns myself. I just don't believe I need to bring them into the street to start a gun fight. If guns stayed in the homes by LAW..then anyone carrying one would be considered "ARMED and in PUBLIC". I don't need the police for home protection...I need the police protection from people who carry them OUTSIDE thier homes.

[Dr_Dug]

Jack...point proven! YOU are part of the problem..you admit it yourself!!

[Tony]

Dr Dug; Idiots can easily be identified; they resort to name calling when they cannot construct a valid argument.

Now then, I'll pose the question again: where does it specifically state in the BoR that you have a right to be 'safe' from 'guns'? The exact passage with that wording if you please? Simple, it does not exist, you have the right to life, liberty...etc, how does a gun on my person take away that right? How about if I use a pen to stab you in the eyeball, can we outlaw those as well?

Strawman argument on the bombs and anthrax; when did I say that? Those items are not guaranteed by the 2A. Nice try, might work when arguing with your kid, better bring a better argument if you'd like to debate me.

Now for the real nitty gritty; can you tell me when a gun law stopped a criminal? Why do all of the current laws keep getting broken by criminals? Do you know who obeys the laws? Not criminals eh?

11:53: "He said it was the second one to signify its importance."

Uh the last time I checked, the first 10 amendments were all introduced at the same time. You know, the Bill of Rights. I don't think one is more important thatn any of the other 9.

[John]

Funny, when was the last time you heard of anyone with a Concealed Weapons Permit shooting someone for other than self-defense? Oh that's right, it's the homey down the street who already illegally has the gun who is bustin' caps. If current gun laws were enforced, gun crimes wouldn't happen nearly as often.

[Tony]

Oh sure, the cops will protect you outside of your home...rotflmao

How wrong can you possible be? Let's see, there were two men shot in St. Pete last night...hmm cops failed to protect them. Virginia Tech?, Columbine? The list is nearly endless. Go do some research and tell me how often a cop is on scene to protect you while you are being threatened with great bodily harm. Cops investigate after the fact, they do little intervention in the comission of a crime.

Gun control was favored by Hitler, Stalin, Mao...worked out great. Australia and the UK banned guns, I just can't figure out how people are still getting shot there though? Oh, yeah, criminals don't obey laws.

Yeah, that's smart, trump property owner's rights for the NRA.

The first fascist freak who tries to break into my truck to see if I have a gun in it… will find out the hard way that I also have a permit to carry one strapped to my ankle.

Tend you own damn business and you wont get hurt!

I can't wait until the American Association of British Quartermasters and Dragoons starts to push their "Redcoats at Home" bill - I'll be damned if anyone screws with my 3rd Amendment Rights

Good to see we are getting back to personal responsibility in this state and beginning to emerge from a culture of victims.

Everyone knows the police are not there to protect you. Instead they investigate crimes, write reports and apprehend suspectes.

Democrats opposed this bill because they thrive on exploiting a culture of victimization and government dependancy.

Now if the Republicans would get on the stick and address the problems relating to illegal immigration they would be making progress at turning things around.

[JJ]

Dr Dug, the bottom line is, if you don't like this law, use your power at the polls to try to vote out the people who passed it. Then get the new legislators to change it. If you find yourself in the minority where you can't get the law changed to your liking, move to another state, where you'll find more people who are like minded with you, maybe NY, IL or CA.

... HA!

"Democrats opposed this bill because they thrive on exploiting a culture of victimization and government dependancy."

... as opposed to the Rebublicons who thrive on fear and Haliburton profit.

... putz

[Association of British Quartermasters and Dragoons]

12:46

You Yankee scallawag. 'This the amendment thrice which has fraught considerble strain. Many pounds must be encumbered every fortnight for the existence of her royal majesty's forces in these haggard days. Certainly the exchequer's purse might be lightned if you wily colonials might merely open your abodes, trite and small though they might be.

... that gave me gas.

[Don't Forget the 9th Amendment]

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

[kevin]

This new legislation will go nicely with that other law whereas if one feels threatened one can open fire! Also, an unarmed petty thief would now only be a smash-n-grab from being an armed petty thief!

"Its the second one." Please tell me he didn't really say that. That's so scary.

[Tony]

Much false assumption on the part of the anti's here.

It's long been legal to have your gun in your car, this law only addresses the rights of the individual to do the same on a business property. Even without this law it is not illegal, the only thing a business owner can do is to ask you to leave if he believes you have a gun, he can ask you to leave for any reason or none at all anyway. Am employer could fire you, but there is no law being broken by carrying your gun at work unless you work at one of the places specifically addressed by the Florida statute relating to concealed carry. If the gun is concealed no business owner will ever see it, if they do it'd be because I am protecting my life, at that point I could care less what the business owner thinks, I'll leave as soon as I safely can.

Worry not my unarmed sheeple, I will never use my gun to protect one of you, becuase the chances are that if I do, you or someone like you will sue me for something. I'll just let you get shot as long as my life is not in danger.

The first fascist freak who tries to break into my truck to see if I have a gun in it… will find out the hard way that I also have a permit to carry one strapped to my ankle.

Tend your own damn business and you wont get hurt!

[Johnny Z]

Guns are extremely safe. Guns are extremely dangerous. The only difference in those two statements is a person who handles the gun.

Bullets were flying to the tune of thousands per hour. Dozens of weapons were being fired feet away from me. I suddenly realized that I had no fear whatsoever. I was at the gun club, and there was not an unfriendly soul there.

It ain't the gun. Its the owner.

the photo along with this thread says everything about why people are so confused. You can't even put up a photo with no bias.

[Andy]

Appaled, I have to agree on one of your points:

" As for protecting yourself in a parking lot, if attacked, the likelihood is that you would be getting into your car and not have access to your gun. As a result, if not armed already, you would probably wind up helping to supply a gun to someone who shouldn't have it. "

What we really need is to be able to carry inside the work area. I often dread when I have to terminate someone's employment. I never know how they will react? So I am a sitting duck waiting for the day to end and praying crazy Joe is not outside with his gun, or following me home! If I had the pistol on my person I would eliminate this threat and feel safer. Bet some students and family of the deceased wish a person had carried and defended against that nut!

Regardless of which side you're on, be aware this bill will be ruled struck down by the courts before it ever takes effect. A similar law in Oklahoma has already been struck down based on federal law requiring employers to provide a safe work environment. The court said if an employer believes prohibiting guns from being on the business property is required to make the workplace safe, then he/she is allowed to do so based on the federal law, which trumps state law.

Pure political play. Pass the bill and make the NRA happy. Then, the business groups sue and claim victory.

Andy,

If you own the company, you can put a gun in your desk if you like.

The point is the authority a business has to make such allowances.

Considering that 95% of the people on here are staffers in Tally, your spelling is atrocius. Please run your posts through SpellCheck in Microsoft Word before you embarass yourselves.

[morganan]

Is anyone else scared the Dr_Dug has several guns????

[osiicks]

If we make gun ownership illegal, then only the government and criminals will have them. The whole second amendment issue will be settled (favorably) in June by the supreme court.

Lock-n-load my fellow cubicle jockeys… lock-n-load… it’s review time and I’m betting I get a raise… THIS TIME!

[osiicks]

A citizen's right to keep and bear arms prevents the "like sheep to the slaughter...שואה" scenario. It keeps government and political parties in check.

[Bill]

Most people are not going to throw their life away by shooting someone at work. This bill allows citizens with no felonies to protect themselves going back and forth to work. It also allows people to protect their kids that they drop off at school or daycare.
Did you read about the woman who came out of her house at 5:am only to be carjacked, last week.
Well she works with my wife at a company that does not allow guns on the property. She never had a chance to defend herself if she wanted to.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

[rich]

The inside of my vehicle is not my employer's property, I don't give a damn where it's parked. The inside of my vehicle is MY property. There are guns inside of cars at almost all businesses & you never hear a word about it because the average working person is not a criminal.

[kitty]

What good is a gun when it's locked in a car and a psycho is rampaging through your workplace?

[kitty]

Good point Tony, but it's a two way street. What if someone overreacts and reaches for their weapon when it's not absolutely necessary, and shoots me or a loved one?

Guess who I would sue into bankruptcy?

rich - the inside may be your property - but if it's parked on your employer's property, your employer does not have to let you park there

Not much, but the one strapped to my ankle will take care of the freak... and you'll thank me when it's over.

The first fascist freak who tries to break into my truck to see if I have a gun in it… will find out the hard way that I also have a permit to carry one strapped to my ankle.

Tend your own damn business and you wont get hurt!

park your truck somewhere else and it won't be a problem.

[Tony]

Well Kitty, I am perfectly fine with your "what if". The choice to use a deadly weapon to protect oneself is not one that should be made in a cavalier manner. You can rest assured that if I do use my gun in public, I did so in fear of my life. No Rambo crap, just simple self defense. Now, if in the process of defending my life I accidentally take an innocent life, then I will likely be prosecuted for manslaughter. This puts the onus on me to make damn sure that discharging my weapon is appropriate and also that I have properly trained myself for just such a scenario.

I have an equal desire to stay free as I do to stay alive. The gun gives me the opportunity to do both, as long as I exercise proper judgement. The gun by itself is irrelevant.

3:29,

Tend your own damn business and you wont get hurt!

[Tony]

3:45 You are not helping the pro-gun side. Your style of communication is exactly what the anti's use to illustrate us as a bunch of trigger happy rednecks.

You need to outsmart them, the tough guy approach does not work.

3:45 go work somewhere else

4:12, move to China

Tony,

I don't need to help anyone's side. I'm an American, it's my right, you can't protect me, I'll protect me and mine, move to China if you don't like it... end of story.

Tony,

Why even pander to these no-gun wussies. Americans will never give up their rights to protect them selves. Our government can’t track illegal immigrants, what makes you think they could collect the guns. Plueeeeeasssse!

[Tony]

4:17 You're an army of one eh? Super tough keyboard commando, with an ankle holster to boot...funny stuff.

It's my right to speak my mind...maybe you should move to China if you don't like that. The 1st ammendment, have you heard of it? It's the one before the 2nd, lol.

So, when you find that your right to keep and bear arms has been taken away because you didn't need anyone to represent you in the judicial process, what will you protect then? You're worst than the anti's, at least they fight for what they believe in.

Btw, while you are wasting time trying to draw from an ankle holster, Joe Criminal will have pumped 6 rounds into you. Have you ever actually timed your draw and fire from that ankle holster? I doubt it, but I'll bet you've watched plenty of Rambo type movies, which makes you a tough guy right?

[Tony]

4:27 They want us to be silent, that's how they get anti-gun laws passed. Sure, the govt may have trouble collecting the guns, but not as much trouble as I'll have if I get caught with one if they became outlawed.

If your right to freedom of speech was in jeopardy, would you simply figure that the govt couldn't possibly shut everyone up, or would you rather it didn't come to pass to begin with?

Wide right, snail boy... wide right... you couldn't out draw a no armed, blind artist.

You freaks can play politics all you want with the malleable-minded jerkweeds... but you'll always know you can never get anyone's guns...

Smoke it up, pinko... smoke it up.

[Charlies Cameraman]

No problem here. We are not scheduled to be in Tallahassee until August. By then he will have forgot everything about the 2Nd one.

[Tonto]

You will give away your rights with the Patriot Act, but don't touch my gun? And I am a gun owner.

[louise kahle]

with the growing amount of violence in
our society this was the cherry on
the sundae.
now i know why residents are leaving
florida.high taxes. no jobs. and now
guns at work.

Correction, Tonto... I did not "give" away my rights with the right-to-spy... errr... Patriot Act... my rights were "taken" away by a commie government faction headed by Dubya!

[Tony]

Louise, high taxes and no jobs are negatives. What's the problem with guns at work? Can you explain exactly how this law is going to affect you? I doubt it, because the law is about having a gun in your car on business property, hardly guns at work is it?

It has also already been legal for people to have those guns in their cars on business property, it was at the same time legal for businesses to ask you to leave if they didn't want guns on their property, this law will take away that provision.

So again, how will this affect you, exactly?

Two things are true.

Right now in most employer parking lots there is at least one car with a gun in glove box. It's been there for years, and no one knows about it nor do they care.

This law does not change that, nor will it encourage the owner of said gun to suddenly want to advertise its presence.

Second, an employer in the state of FL can fire you for bad breath, poor communication skills, or any other reason their lawyers come up with if they really want to get rid of you and your weapon.

This law doesn't change that either.

So at the end of the day, a philosophical argument was won - but nothing really changed.

[Bill]

If somebody wants to go postal, a company rule will not stop them from bringing a gun to work. Stopping guns in cars just stops law abiding ccw permit holders from protecting themselves and children going back and forth to work and day care.
How many times has a woman been killed by a spouse with a restraining order?
Violating the restraining order is the least of his problems.
Same thing here, going postal at work, the least of that person's problem is that he broke the company rule.

[Tony]

Another true fact; everyday I and many others move among you unarmed people with guns in holsters. We eat at restaruants, shop at the mall and big box stores, go to the movies, buy groceries and get gas. All the while you are blissfully unaware and lo and behold none of those legally carried guns are jumping out of holsters and scaring you poor sheeple to death. Imagine that!

If in order for you to feel safe, you need to infringe upon my right, you have failed Constitution 101

[John]

I'm curious to know where "Annie Oakley" (11:24) got a concealed weapons permit over breakfast, without any training... If that's what it is she got.

[UF Alumni]

Everyone on this blog is a Constitutional expert yet no one has noticed that the phrase "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" isn't in Bill of Rights. Those words appear in the Declaration of Independence which is not a document of laws like the Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

[Buckeye]

Leave it to a gaytor to post something without addressing the issue at hand.

Why don't you at least educate us all on the legal basis of this bill as it pertains to the 2A? It's the least an esteemed Constitutional law professor such as yourself could do for us.

[jeff]

Insanity rules once again under the misguided, fascist tiny minds and their perverse love affair with guns. Republican conservatism is the true enemy of this great country. These NRA whackos have more American blood on their hands than all terrorist organizations combined. Their disgusting opposition to any kind of reasonable controls on guns has caused thousands of deaths and will continue to do so. These so-called patriots actually have argued that the criminally insane should be able to possess a gun. The NRA should be treated as a terrorist organization and banned just like the KKK or any other anti-American organization. The founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if they could see how the blood-thirsty tiny minds have completely distorted the 2nd amendment. This country is doomed if we follow the path of the rightwingers - those that put their party ahead of their country. They make me sick.

[Al Gore]

Hey Liberal Communist DirtBags.....

I have a gun, and rely on it for self protection....

Unlike Rosie O', Fat Teddy Kennedy, and Barack Osama who have armed bodyguards......

I am loving the Osama/Hillary/Dean debacle!!!!!!!!!!

Keep up the GREAT work!

The first fascist freak who tries to break into my truck to see if I have a gun in it… will find out the hard way that I also have a permit to carry one strapped to my ankle.

Tend your own damn business and you wont get hurt!

[UF Alumni]

7:00 Gaytor..haha. your buddies in your GED program tell you that one? If you bothered to read the 90 previous posts you might understand the relevance of my comment. If you need help with some of the bigger words just ask.

[R]

Police have no requirement to protect individuals, only uphold the law. "To Serve and Protect" is only for the sides of their cars but is not required by law.

The second amendment is there in part to protect us from the tyranny of government. Tyranny of government can be found in both its action and inaction. Government institutions say they will protect you but are not legally required to (see police example above). This is exactly what the second amendment provides for; the people's (individual) right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

I found ONE Democrat I can respect, Sen. Mandy Dawson. All the others wish to inflict their tyrannical government on us.

Gun-safe/free zones, what a joke... As a CWP holder I should be able to legally carry anywhere that criminals can since I cannot rely on police/government to protect me.

[Indivisibility of Democratic Rights Supporter]

April 10, 2008: I've supported abortion rights my entire life. I've supported gay rights my entire life. I've supported racial equality, affirmative action, and racial integration my entire life. If the Equal Rights Amendment comes back, I will vote for it. I oppose laws that stop people from putting into their bodies whatever they want to put into their bodies, including laws banning drugs, and cigarette smoking. I oppose laws banning books, magazines, pornography, videos.

What I want to know is this: I am a gun owner. I am a licensed gun owner. The way I was born and brought up is this: democratic rights are indivisible.

In 1926, a black man, a Mr. Sweet, moved into a white neighborhood with his family. A gang of white mobsters, real reacist mobsters, tried with violence to drive him out of his neighborhood. He repulsed the attack, with a gun. Instead of the authorities going after the racists, they prosecuted him. Guess what, anti-gunners? He was defended by liberal attorney Clarence Darrow, who was then with the ACLU. At that time, in 1926, Darrow, the ACLU, and liberals, recognized the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

There's this liberal pacifist Democratic Party-sponsored myth that it was Martin Luther King-style pacifism that won black voting rights in the Southern states and won the defeat of "Jim Crow"-style racial segregation legal codes in the Southern states.

But there's a couple of interesting books that entirely challenge that perspective.

One is the book, "Radio Free Dixie: Robert F. Williams and the Roots of Black Power," authored by liberal Southern historian, Timothy Tyson. Guess what Robert F. Williams did? He re-organized the Monroe, North Carolina, NAACP in the 1950s after all the petit-bourgeois gutless black liberals walked out of the chapter, and he recruited black working class armed forces veterans to the chapter. These people did not hold to the Martin Luther King "Turn the other cheek" mantra. The U.S. Supreme Court in 1954 had come down with the legal decision stating racially segregated schools were unequal and unconstitutional. In Monroe, white racists set up a big howl over this, which is why the petit-bourgeois liberals in the liberal professional white-collar class of black people did not challenge it. It took black working class armed forces veterans to challenge it. Do you petit-bourgeois liberal Democrats want to know how they did challenge it? I'll tell you how.

Robert F. Williams came in, re-organized the NAACP, recruited literally hundreds of blue-collar black members. Then, when relatively pacifist-minded black and white integration-minded people picketed in support of integration, this time, instead of the Ku Klux Klan killers going in and being able to mop them up and rip them apart with white terrorist physical violence, the Klan terrorists couldn't do it. I'll tell you why. Standing nearby were discreet and well-armed black men from the local Monroe NAACP. Robert F. Williams had to do this, because the Klan and the cops worked hand in hand. Heck, they still do. It's just better camouflaged nowadays. In any case, that is what finally broke the back of KKK terror in Monroe, North Carolina in the 1950s, and actually won gains for racially integrated public facilities like a racially integrated public swimming pool for both black kids and white kids there, and eventually won the breakdown of the racial segregation "Jim Crow" codes keeping black and white schools segregated. For the success of his courageous effort, Robert F. Williams was attacked by the petit-bourgeois black liberal national leadership of the NAACP in New York City. They took a vote and deposed him from his leadership. Guess what? The local Monroe rank and file NAACPers ignored the national liberal NAACP, and voted Williams back as head of their local chapter. Finally, after trying to set up Williams that way, the petit-bourgeois liberals got what they wanted when J. Edgar Hoover's viciously racist and right-wing anti-communist FBI, under the liberal Democratic administration of president Jack Kennedy, literally forced Robert F. Williams to flee the country in the early 1960s. Williams ended up in Cuba, given asylum by the recently victorious Cuban revolutionary governmental regime of Castro, broadcasting a radio program back into the U.S. to black people called, "Radio Free Dixie." After awhile, he left Cuba and moved to China. Finally, he was allowed back into the States in the 1970s. Tyson's book is the most recent book on his efforts at organizing armed self-defense against right-wing racist terrorism in the Southern states. An earlier biography of Williams was written in the 1970s and was called, "Black Crusader: A Biography of Robert F. Williams," and it's by Robert Cohen.

But the liberals basically felt black people should drop dead. It took organized self-defense against racist terror for black people to even start to win integration, voting rights, the defeat of "Jim Crow" in the Southern states. But you won't hear that story from the petit-bourgeois pacifistic liberal Democrats.

Williams, by the way, wrote his own book on his own experiences. It's entitled, "Negroes with Guns." In his book, by the way, Williams -- who was not by any means crazy, but a smart, levelheaded, modest, soft-spoken man (I actually heard him speak in 1976 at an educational forum in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania sponsored there not by a petit-bourgeois liberal group, or by some kind of right-wing group, but by a socialist political organization.) of great personal courage -- stressed that, in his view, self-defense deterred violence, rather than causing or making it more likely to happen. And reading about his experiences, one is pretty much compelled to say, if one organizes in a modest, levelheaded, conservative, rational fashion self-defense against terrorism, it can, indeed, be very effective in deterring terrorism. And that is what Williams' NAACP was organizing against in Monroe in the 1950s. The cops, of course, worked hand in glove with the Klan.

Then, there is another instance of this occurring that no liberal Democrat will tell you about. There's a book about this instance, too. It's called, "The Deacons for Defense: Armed Resistance and the Civil Rights Movement," and it, too, is by a liberal historian, a guy named Lance Hill.

The Deacons for Defense and Justice were started in Louisiana, and spread to Southwest Mississippi, in 1963 and 1964, in the aftermath of some really horrible murders there of black and white civil rights and voting rights activists and organizers. The Deacons were organized by both black, and even a couple of white, CORE (Congress of Racial Equality) civil rights and voting rights and legal rights organizers. They were organized mainly because, just as in Monroe, North Carolina, in the later 1950s and early 1960s, so in Southwest Mississippi and in Louisiana in the 1960s, the cops and the Ku Klux Klan white racial terrorists worked together. Indeed, the murders of 3 civil rights workers in Mississippi in 1964, one black Southerner named James Cheney, and two New Yorkers named Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman, who together were investigating a church bombing and burning there, had a lot to do with changing a lot of tactics among civil rights activists there, because the murders of Goodman, Cheney, and Schwerner involved the active complicity of Mississippi cops and Ku Klux Klan terrorists.

The Deacons for Defense arose essentially as an armed black self-defense guard or squad of discreet black men who accompanied both black and white voting rights registration organizers and workers around the rural areas of both Louisiana and Mississippi, proving, in effect, protection for these voting registration workers which the cops refused to provide.

Lance Hill's narrative, "The Deacons for Defense: Armed Resistance and the Civil Rights Movement," makes it eminently clear the Deacons were organized as a self-defense guard. In the 1965 Selma-to-Montgomery march, the Deacons provided some protection at various places where the march was happening. But, of course, when some marchers went off on their own -- as in the terrible case of Mrs. Viola Liuzzo and her black male companion who were trying to ferry food and drink to the marchers -- they were in terrible danger from white terrorist attacks, and Mrs. Liuzzo was killed in a car by Klan terrorists (actually, as a later ACLU law suit showed, by an actual government FBI informant named Gary Thomas Rowe, who himself had a long history of white racist terrorist activism and was the actual triggerman in the murder of Mrs. Liuzzo). Neither Mrs. Liuzzo nor her black male companion were armed.

But in those places where Deacons provided protection, white terrorists could not successfully attack people.

I lived in New York State near New York City in the period of around 1963, when the liberal Democrats sitting on the New York City Council, at the time when Malcolm X had broken away from the Nation of Islam, was himself encountering and enduring threats of violence against him and his family from his former Nation of Islam colleagues. The liberal Democrats sitting on the New York City Council hated Malcolm X's guts, because he was not a liberal, but a black radical who was completely incorruptible and did not buy into the fraud of either the Republican or Democratic Parties, but was willing in his last year to work with left-wing socialists and discuss the possibility of independent political action, independent of both the Democrats and Republicans. So the New York City Council passed a "gun control" law effectively disarming black people like Malcolm whose lives were being threatened by right-wing racists and, in Malcolm's case, the right-wing Nation of Islam racial separatists. In this period of being forcibly disarmed by the liberals, in 1965, Malcolm, while delivering a speech at the Audubon Ballroom in Harlem, was shot dead by a probably collaborative effort in which Nation of Islam right-wing racial separatist religious fanatics probably were involved with NYPD cops and perhaps even the "red squad" of the racist, right-wing Hoover FBI.

I also remember when the Black Panthers started out. Today, the Democrats and Republicans both lie about this party, which originally started out as a self-defense effort of black people in the black ghettos to basically monitor police violence and police terrorism in the black ghettos against black people. The Panthers would follow police cars around with cameras in parts of the country where they could be legally armed, and would also be armed, and when the cops started roughing up black arrestees, the Panthers would get out of their cars with their cameras drawn, and take photos, and when the cops would tell them to stop, the cops would notice the Panthers were armed. This made the cops apoplectic, because they didn't want their officially sponsored racist violence recorded on camera, but here were legally armed black men following them around recording the official racist violence of the police.

After this happened, the California legislature's Democrats sponsored "gun control" legislation, mainly to deprive black people of their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

I started out in 1963 being a liberal Democrat. But after I saw the liberals in the Democratic Party national convention in 1964 tell Fannie Lou Hamer and the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party delegation of rural impoverished poor working class black sharecroppers who traveled all the way to New Jersey for that convention to get seated as the only truly democratically representative Democratic Party delegation to drop dead, I moved away from the Democrats to the left, and stayed there. I never went back.

And part of my move was to come after a couple of years of pacifism to agree with Second Amendment supporters and to defend the right to keep and bear arms.

To me, democratic rights are indivisible.

And on the issue of the conflict between the individual's human right of self-defense against any kind of violent or criminal assault and, on the other hand, a capitalist employer's denial of the individual democratic and civil and human right to self-defense against criminal assault, I side with the individual's democratic and civil and human right to self-defense.

I guess some of the libertarians and Republicans on this site will have heart attacks that an old left-wing unreconstructed 1960s era New Left socialist would take a position like this, because a lot of you have undoubtedly been brainwashed into thinking those of us in the New Left in the 1960s were a bunch of terrorists. Well, we were not. We were the ones opposing white racist terrorism in the South, and we were the ones who favored the right of people to defend themselves from that white racial terrorism in the South.

We also just happened to oppose U.S. imperialism, including American imperialism's armed occupation of Vietnam, because, the way we saw it, it was the Vietnamese people's right to decide the fate of their own country, not America, and not before America, France, and before France, not Britain, and before Britain, not Japan, and before Japan, not France again. We figured, if the U.S. could have fought an anti-imperialist revolution against England, the Vietnamese could fight an anti-imperialist revolution against France, Japan, Britain, France, and America.

I think we were more consistent than a lot of you right-wingers, who today support, as I do, the Second Amendment, but who also think it's okay for American imperialism to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan. I don't.

But in any case, on this issue, I support the individual's human right to self-defense.

And if I am employed somewhere and get assaulted in some parking lot where the boss says, you can't have a gun in your car, I'm going to sue the boss till he's bankrupt.

Or, at least, I'll insure my relatives know who the boss is so if I'm dead, they can sue him not only for all expenses, but for liability related to my wrongful death.

Got that?

[2ndamendmentwasagainstgovtalpowersnoteachother]

oh yes let the valium/prozac toting employee have a gun in their car when he/she gets the pink slip and he/she decides to pull the trigger toward their boss, then see how fast the law suits hit the fan.....

employer will not be liable since the law allows the guns at work in the car .....culprit will not be liable since their actions were result of not taking their meds(legitimate loonacy)...so I guess the idiots in Tallahassee will be liable to the victims....aka the taxpayer again...wow
what a dumb idea.