Hill Seeks Repeal Of Gun Laws Imposed After Parkland Shooting

January 10, 2019

Rep. Mike Hill has filed a bill in the Florida House that would remove some of the gun restrictions put into place after the shootings at last year at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland.

The bill would lower the age to purchase a firearm in Florida from 21 to 18, remove a three-day waiting period to purchase shotguns and rifles, and remove restrictions on bump stocks.

The provisions were signed into law by then-Governor Rick Scott in March 2018.

The bill must navigate through a long process of committee assignments and be approved by the full House and Senate before making it to the governor’s desk to be signed into law.

Comments

31 Responses to “Hill Seeks Repeal Of Gun Laws Imposed After Parkland Shooting”

  1. John on January 13th, 2019 10:27 pm

    Law abiding people are not the problem.

  2. David Huie Green on January 12th, 2019 8:37 pm

    REGARDING:
    “That falls under the 10th Amendment guaranteeing state’s rights.”

    The 10th doesn’t mention states having rights, only powers. People have rights in the Constitution.

    10 “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

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

    14 in part “…No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

    The 14th allows civil rights to be curtailed for crimes. It SPELLS it out.

    People often pretend what is said is not what is REALLY meant.

    David for better people

  3. David Huie Green on January 12th, 2019 8:22 pm

    REGARDING:
    “…not a single mention of the lives lost in Parkland.”

    They will remain dead no matter what you say.

    The one who killed them was breaking several laws at the time. Prior restraint of civil rights because of unlawful actions of a criminal is generally considered another crime. Had he been forced to use some other tool to kill them, it would not have mattered which tool he was NOT allowed to lawfully use.

    It is somewhat unreasonable knowing full well that there are monsters around us and assuming that the solution is to restrict the right to self defense from those monsters. It’s like building a wall with multiple openings and expecting it to stop anything. You can always go over, under, around or through.

    David for better people

  4. NufSaid on January 11th, 2019 10:17 pm

    Interesting.

    All the comments are about gun rights. Yet, not a single mention of the lives lost in Parkland.

    And over in another story, nothing but pro-life comments.

    So, all babies should be born, but once born, gun rights become more important than the lives of all who were once the babies of those who chose not to abort.

  5. John Q. Public on January 11th, 2019 7:26 pm

    @histbuff

    Whatever floats yer narrative, homeboy.

  6. Ben Preston on January 11th, 2019 7:21 pm

    @histbuff: Very well said! The constitution of the United States very clearly states that the right shall not be infringed.

  7. Brian H on January 11th, 2019 3:41 pm

    John Q:

    It does not matter if my rights are not being violated or yours, the law that the legislature passed was and is unconstitutional. Period, end of sentence.

  8. histbuff on January 11th, 2019 2:49 pm

    @John Q. Public, you wrote, “the Constitution does not specificaly outline how the 2nd amendment is to be applied. That falls under the 10th Amendment guaranteeing state’s rights.”

    That is pure 100% revisionist-history. The purpose of the 10th Amendment is to protect other rights not mentioned in the Constitution, which includes the Bill of Rights. The 10th Amendment reads:

    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

    The 2nd Amendment prohibits the federal government and the states from infringing the right to keep and bear arms — this clause:

    “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    Power-hungry tyrants, and their (equally power-hungry) apologists, are always seeking ways to usurp power from the people. But, first, they must disarm the people, which requires them to undermine the plain words of the constitution and rewrite history, as you are attempting to do.

  9. John Q. Public on January 11th, 2019 11:56 am

    @Brian H.

    You act as if these laws and the application thereof are written for me specifically. My rights are not being infringed upon, neither are yours. This is about the law, not about how you feel.

    If there should be no restrictions on 2A, maybe convicted felons should have the right to bear arms. How about those adjudicated mentally ill? People would rather live in a world where they can legally shoot those people if they pose a threat, instead of handling the problem before it becomes a threat. Perhaps we should just get rid of background checks too?

    Again, the Constitution does not specifically outline how the 2nd amendment is to be applied. That falls under the 10th Amendment guaranteeing state’s rights.

  10. histbuff on January 11th, 2019 11:23 am

    @ John Q. Public: If you think Government gives you rights, you are not well.

  11. John Q. Public on January 11th, 2019 10:14 am

    @Ben Preston

    You still have the constitutional right to bear arms. Just as soon as you turn 21.

    The tenth amendment to the US Constitution allows states the right to enact legislation not specifically outlined in the Constitution. So barring repeals at the state level (possible) or a new Constitutional amendment specifically outlining the rights guaranteed by the second amendment (an almost 0% chance), you’re probably out of luck.

    Upholding the Constitution means abiding by all of it, not just the parts we like, for all Americans, not just the ones we like.

  12. Brian H on January 11th, 2019 7:39 am

    Wow, I love the falsehoods I have seen in the comments. Adult I am far from 18 and have disagreed that a legal adult (18 by current law) can not buy alcohol and now guns in the state of Florida. By God, an 18 year old can join the military, vote and pay taxes.

    John Q Public: You are the worst type of gun owner, as long as YOUR rights are not infringed you find it ok to infringe on someone else’s. Please think about that for a long minute.

    Donald Tenhagen: I’ve read the 2nd Amendment, the Federalist Papers and all manners of writings from the founders of our nation and nowhere can I find any reference that “need” plays any part. Also, if you really want to stop murder, we should be looking at banning hands and feet as per FBI statistics those are used in far more murders then long guns of any type.

  13. Otto on January 11th, 2019 5:50 am

    “I find it interesting that we can draft 18 year old BOYS and put a rifle in their hands after boot camp but refuse to let them buy one at Walmart if they so desire. Wake up and Smell the coffee before your nanny-statism takes away a right that you yourself actually care about. It’ll happen, mark my words.”

    Here is the difference when they leave boot camp they are properly trained in the handling of a firearm. You have to take hunter safety courses before you go hunting don’t you? Do you have to take a driver’s test? You should have to pass such a course/test to get a firearm. The NRA could be part of a mandated training system with state/federal government governments to obtain such a license. The NRA has become just a shrill and inflexible as the extreme left end of the political spectrum that doesn’t want anybody to own a firearm.

  14. Rich7553 on January 10th, 2019 9:16 pm

    DONALD TENHAGEN,

    Firearms ownership is an enumerated constitutional right incorporated against the states under the 14th Amendment due process clause. Alcohol snd tobacco are not.

  15. Rich7553 on January 10th, 2019 9:14 pm

    Kate -

    How much does Rep. Hill get ftom the NRA? Cite your source please. You can’t, because you made it up. Nice try.

  16. Ben Preston on January 10th, 2019 6:58 pm

    @Adult: I’m 20 years old and have been working and taking college courses since my senior year of high school. I don’t know what Constitution you’ve read, but my copy says that I have the RIGHT to firearms. This emotions based law that was recklessly implemented is 100% unconstitutional. I’m considered an adult in all aspects of the law, but I can’t go buy a rifle or shotgun for home protection now.

    @John Q. Public: At this time, I can no longer walk into a store and purchase a firearm of any kind. I can also not purchase a stripped lower like you mentioned. This is not only an “inconvenience”, but an unconstitutional denial of my rights.

    I prefer dangerous freedom over peacefull slavery.

    Also, quit hiding behind some made up name! Take a stance for what you believe and let people know who you are.

  17. John Q. Public on January 10th, 2019 5:34 pm

    @histbuff

    If these patriots think God gave them the right to bear arms, they probably shouldn’t own a gun in the first place.

  18. yeahsure on January 10th, 2019 5:28 pm

    I love comments like “Hill gets a boat load of money from the NRA”. This is the default statement of folks who have listened to nothing but America-hating, marxist-infused “news” set to repeat 24/7.

    I find it interesting that we can draft 18 year old BOYS and put a rifle in their hands after boot camp but refuse to let them buy one at Walmart if they so desire. Wake up and Smell the coffee before your nanny-statism takes away a right that you yourself actually care about. It’ll happen, mark my words.

  19. Grad on January 10th, 2019 4:09 pm

    So DONALD TENHAGEn, you are saying that age restrictions should be based upon how lethal something is? What about cars and trucks?

  20. Over sight on January 10th, 2019 4:04 pm

    Good now order an full forensic audit for Century. Mike Hill

  21. histbuff on January 10th, 2019 3:44 pm

    @Kate: You would do well to start researching REAL history, instead of the propaganda pablum spewed out in today’s indoctrination centers (schools) and the MSM. Hopefully you will be motivated to seek and discover what history tells us of communism, indoctrination, and tyranny.

  22. Kate on January 10th, 2019 2:56 pm

    Hill gets a big load of money from the NRA, and you think its because he is a patriot, a big constitution guy. NRA panders to idiots who think guns give them an edge.. When you use terms like commies, you prove your ignorance.

  23. David E Donaldson on January 10th, 2019 2:09 pm

    Restrictions absolutely do not put a halt on crime at all. Look at Chicago and New York, some of the toughest gun restrictions ever, but they are of no use whatsoever. I say “YES” to the removal of these useless restrictions, for all they do is to bind the hands of the honest people of our state.

  24. histbuff on January 10th, 2019 2:03 pm

    @Adult: 18 yr olds contemplating college darn well better be thinking about arming themselves. Colleges are very dangerous places since the commies took over.

    @John Q. Public: Every politician panders to his base. Mr. Hill’s base is largely constitution-loving patriots who know they have the GOD-given right to keep and bear arms WITHOUT infringement by a bunch of “I am here to protect you from yourself” thugs posing as lawmakers.

  25. DONALD TENHAGEn on January 10th, 2019 1:58 pm

    the current law is just common sense. You have to be 21 to buy alchol and tobacco products, guns are a lot more lethal . rep hill is just catering to his his donars not the public. this law does not take away your 2nd amendment rights, if you can’t wait 3 days you probabily should reevaluate your need to buy a weapon. also, no one needs a bump stock for anything.

  26. Michael Bonsall on January 10th, 2019 1:51 pm

    Thank you for all that do Mr. Hill, your efforts are greatly appreciated.

  27. John Q. Public on January 10th, 2019 12:44 pm

    An inconvenience as to the amount of time it takes to purchase a firearm does not constitute a stripping of rights. If you are legally allowed to purchase a firearm, you can still do so, with a 3 day waiting period.

    If you have a Florida CCW permit, there is no wait.

    I purchased a stripped AR15 lower a few months ago. This is a machined piece of aluminum. It is unusable as a weapon until built out. It is still a 3 day waiting period because it is the serialized part that the ATF considers the “firearm.”. I can be patient for 3 days to pick up my piece of metal if the law saves even only one life.

    What Mr. Hill is doing is pandering to his base, essentially wasting your tax dollars and mine to ingratiate himself with the people who already support him. This is not your elected official at work, this is your official playing politics at our expense. Sadly, this is becoming the norm in our government.

  28. histbuff on January 10th, 2019 11:51 am

    Thank you, Mr. Hill! You don’t personally me, but please know that your efforts are much appreciated! God Bless you and your family!

  29. Adult on January 10th, 2019 10:45 am

    Can’t buy alcohol until 21 years old should also apply to gun ownership. Juveniles can be sentenced as adults for certain crimes so that doesn’t mean they are adults. At 18 the “adults” should be starting college or working for a living not worrying about buying a gun.

  30. Karen McLendon on January 10th, 2019 9:27 am

    Thanks Mr. Hill!
    I sure hope this bill passes as I agree with what Brian said about constitutional rights being stripped from adults!

  31. Brian on January 10th, 2019 8:45 am

    Good. Sorry but that was an overreaction to a terrible event. In response, we took adults constitutional rights from them





Have a comment on this story?

We welcome your comments on this story, but there are some rules to follow::

(1) Be Nice. No comments that slander another, no racism, no sexism, no personal attacks.

(2) No Harrassing Comments. If someone says something bad about you, don't respond. That's childish.

(3) No Libel. That's saying something is not true about someone. Don't do it.

(4) Keep it clean. Nothing vulgar, obscene or sexually related. No profanity or obvious substitutions. Period.

(5) NorthEscambia.com reserves the right to remove any comments that violate our rules or we think to be inappropriate. We are not responsible for what is posted. Comments may not appear right away until they are approved by a moderator.

(6) Limit your comments to the subject in this story only, and limit comments to 300 words or less. Do not post copyrighted material. Comments will not be added to stories that are over 30 days old.

(7) No posts may advertise a commercial business or political group, or link to another commercial web site or political site of any kind.