With the largest number of gun sellers per capita in the nation and what many consider to be lenient gun laws, Florida has been called the “Wild West of the South.” But following a school shooting in Parkland, Florida that took the lives of 17 people and wounded 17 more, the public’s cry for action could not be ignored. In a move that surprised many and broke from his traditional NRA leanings, Florida Governor Rick Scott signed a sweeping $400 million school safety bill into law, aiming to implement new gun control measures.
Hours later, the NRA filed a lawsuit challenging the bill.
So what does this mean for Sunshine State gun owners and gun control advocates—and those who identify as both? It’s safe to say there has been much confusion surrounding the bill and the NRA’s corresponding lawsuit, so we’re here to set the record straight by simply presenting the facts, letting you be the judge.
First, let’s first take a look at what the bill does—and what it doesn’t do.
The Florida State Senate Bill 7026
The new Florida State Senate Bill 7026, otherwise known as the “Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act” after the Parkland school in which the shootings occurred, aims to do the following:
Following the signing of the bill, Governor Scott addressed the crowd that had gathered at the Florida Capitol Building in Tallahassee. "You made your voices heard," he said. "You didn't let up and you fought until there was change. You helped change our state. You made a difference. You should be proud."
The National Rifle Association Lawsuit
The NRA lawsuit does not argue with all the provisions of the bill; in fact it supports numerous aspects of the bill, including the ability for schools to increase security and the goal of keeping guns away from people who are considered mentally ill. Where contention lies, however, is with the age restriction.
The NRA’s suit states that the Senate Bill is an affront to the second amendment and turns a select group of individuals into second-class citizens. In particular they argue that:
“It’s gratuitous gun control,” said Marion Hammer, the NRA’s Florida lobbyist who opposes the waiting period and bump-fire restrictions in addition to age limits. “We oppose punishing law-abiding gun owners. This [bill] punishes law-abiding gun owners for the acts of a criminal and the failure of the FBI, DCF and the SRO (School Resource Officer).”
Where Do You Stand?
It’s a complex and understandably touchy subject: what one considers common sense, another considers an infringement on rights.
Again, while our hearts ache for our fellow Floridians and all other victims of violence, we’re not here to weigh in; rather, our goal is to simply keep you informed by organizing the facts and presenting them in a meaningful way that allows you to form your own opinions on the matter.
Just as we look at both sides in each case we tackle, we want to give you the opportunity to do so too. At Lowman Law Firm, we’re always looking out for you.