The Florida Attorney General’s position is that anyone carrying a gun should always be presumed to be committing a felony; and apparently, everyone is carrying…

"[A]n overwhelming majority of Floridians are not licensed to carry concealed weapons. As of August 31, 2012, the number of concealed weapon or firearm permits issued in Florida is 971,263. Where Florida had an estimated population of 19,057,542 in 2011, the percentage of the population that is licensed to carry a concealed weapon is only five percent (5%). Given the small percentage of the population that is licensed to carry a concealed firearm, the overwhelming majority of firearms, or 95%, are not licensed to be concealed. Thus, an officer’s suspicion that a firearm is not licensed would be reasonable because, in any given case, there would be, statistically speaking, a 95% likelihood of illegality."
State’s Brief on the Merits, Mackey v. State SC12-573 (Fla 2012) (internal citations omitted, emphasis added)

Obviously, this cannot go without answer. ”What will be our reply?!” you ask…

"It has been said that figures lie and liars figure. This statement has never been more appropriate than in response to the State’s contention that 95% of firearms in Florida are not licensed to be concealed. (State’s brief Pg. 20). Such a statement requires ignoring basic rules of statistics, ignoring the lack of available data, ignoring the fact that there is no requirement to license individual guns in the state (doing so is a felony, See Sec. 790.335, Fla. Stat.), and ignoring the fact that some people own multiple guns.

The State’s argument is that because only 5% of the population of Florida, holds a CWFL there is a 95% likelihood that a person with a firearm is committing a crime. Such a statement relies on several assumptions that are easily dismissed as common sense. In order for the State’s argument to be valid, one would first have to ignore all visitors to our state from the 35 states with reciprocity. One would also have to ignore all of the circumstances where no license is required to possess a firearm.Furthermore, the State’s argument also assumes that every man, woman and minor child is carrying a firearm at all times. Only by ignoring these statistical values and making a ridiculous assumption, could the State validate its absurd statistical argument that 95% of persons carrying firearms are doing so illegally."
Amicus Curiae Florida Carry, inc.’s Brief in Support of Appellant, Mackey v. State SC12-573 (Fla 2012) (emphasis added)

Our Attorney General says that not only do police and prosecutors have reasonable suspicion to frisk you any time you carry in FL, but that carrying also gives probable cause to search and arrest!

"Thus, the crime of carrying a concealed weapon is complete upon proof that the defendant knowingly carried a firearm that was concealed from the ordinary sight of another person. Accordingly, as held by the Third District, knowledge of the absence of a concealed weapons permit is not required in order for an officer to conduct an investigatory stop.
…
[P]ossession of a firearm did not amount merely reasonable suspicion, but to probable cause. See, e.g., State v. Navarro, 464 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (holding that a police officer’s observation of a bulge under the clothing of an individual, which the officer in his training and experience determined to be “the outline of a firearm[,] amounted to probable cause to believe that the individual was carrying a concealed weapon, justifying not merely a pat-down, but a search”)."
State’s Brief on the Merits, Mackey v. State SC12-573 (Fla 2012) (emphasis added)

Our answer… Shall not be Infringed!

"The rights of Floridians to keep and bear arms are well recognized in the U.S. and Florida Constitutions as well as in Florida general law. To allow detentions and arrests based solely on a person’s possession of a firearm without more, and then to require a person to prove through an affirmative defense that their possession of the firearm was lawful would swallow whole the right. As inconvenient as it might be, the need for enforcement of firearms laws preventing carrying by the unlawful and unskilled, must sometimes give way to the God-given right of the people to both lawfully keep and bear arms, and be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
…
The state’s position can be summed up that in order for a citizen to exercise their right under the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I Sec. 8 of the Florida Constitution, the citizen must give up their rights under the Fourth Amendment, to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. According to the Attorney General, persons in possession of a firearm should be presumed to be committing a crime, and should be required to prove before a court of law that their conduct is in fact lawful. Should the Court find in the State’s favor in this case, this would be the first time in American jurisprudence that the exercise of a fundamental individual right has required the abdication of another fundamental right."
Amicus Curiae Florida Carry, inc.’s Brief in Support of Appellant, Mackey v. State SC12-573 (Fla 2012) (emphasis added)

But AG Bondi’s office says:

"The Florida concealed weapon or firearm license application requires an applicant to read and become knowledgeable of the provisions of Chapter 790, Florida Statutes and includes a copy of the statutes in that chapter in the application.
…
see also State v. Williams, 794 N.W.2d 867, 876 (Minn. 2011) (Page, J., concurring) (“[I]t is likely to come as a shock to all those people who have obtained a permit to carry, hold, or possess a pistol in a public place that by carrying, holding, or possessing the permitted pistol in a public place they subject themselves to arrest.” … )."

State’s Brief on the Merits, Mackey v. State SC12-573 (Fla 2012) (emphasis added)

Our Amicus Brief has already been filed with the FL Supreme Court.

Docket Overview: FL Supreme Court Case Number:  SC12-573
Florida Supreme Court Docket

Florida Carry Appeals Absurd Lower Court Decision On University Parking Lot Gun Bans

On October 3^rd, 2011 Florida Carry, Inc. filed a lawsuit against the University of North Florida (UNF), seeking a permanent injunction to stop the university from enforcing its unlawful ban on firearms and other defensive weapons. We also asked for a court order to repeal their unlawful regulations and remove all preempted signs/publications. Since 1987 the Florida Legislature has preempted firearms law and issued statewide licenses to carry for self-defense. Since 1985 it has been legal for adults to securely store firearms in their cars, even without a state license, on college campuses.

Florida Carry filed this case on behalf of Florida Gun Owners and our members. One such member, Alexandria Lainez, is a single mother who has received extensive training in firearms and self-defense to be prepared to protect herself and her young child should that horrible need arise. Alexandria is a full time student at UNF and worries that she has to choose between her family's safety and her education on a daily basis while attending college.

On November 11^th, 2011 we filed for a Temporary Injunction to protect students' Right to Bear Arms in their own vehicles, as recognized under Florida law, while the case is pending.  After months of waiting for a ruling, we notified the court that this issue should be treated as a priority case.  Florida Circuit Court Judge Lawrence P. Haddock immediately issued an order that was published April 4^th, 2012.  He simply signed the defense's suggested draft order denying the injunction and then dismissing the case.

Judge Haddock’s woefully under-considered ruling effectively held that Florida colleges, universities, and private corporations that run all manner of “Schools” have the authority to create a felony “Defense Free, Anti-Gun Zone” at will, without legislative oversight or accountability.

The Legislature made it legal to have a securely encased firearm safely stored in a private vehicle parked on campus. Despite this clear statutory language, the court today ruled that, it then gave all schools the authority opt-out of the statute’s provisions to make what the Legislature had declared legal a third degree felony.

The relevant statute says:

A person shall not possess any firearm, … or other weapon … on the property of any school… ; however, a person may carry a firearm:

In a vehicle pursuant to s. 790.25(5); except that school districts may adopt written and published policies that waive the exception in this subparagraph for purposes of student and campus parking privileges.

Since the statute does provide a definition of “school district” or “refer to the Florida Constitution” Judge Haddock refused to interpret “school district” to mean “school district” as it is defined in the Florida Constitution or even as it is commonly understood by other courts or the people.

After deciding that the Florida Constitution is an insufficient source for a legal definition, Judge Haddock then ignored US Supreme Court precedent and looked to Senate Floor Debate between a few legislators discussing part of a law which passed 11 years earlier; legislation that the cited legislators did not even take part in.

In fact, the Florida Legislature refused to pass a provision in 1997 that would have had the same effect that Judge Haddock’s ruling did today.  Instead, the legislature’s 1997’s K-12 School Violence Bill limited the ability to create a felony for possessing a securely encased handgun in your car to the publicly elected officials of School Districts.  That entire 1997 bill, HB 1039, was passed to establish “Zero Tolerance” laws that only impacted K-12 Schools.

Judges, attorneys, legislators, and the people of Florida know very well that it would be an unconstitutional grant of authority to allow non-elected bureaucrats and company owners to create a felony.  That’s exactly what Judge Haddock has now ruled that all schools in Florida can do.  Even private “schools” run by for-profit corporations would be able to create a felony by just publishing a waiver to Florida law.

“It’s outrageous!” Said Sean Caranna, Executive Director of Florida Carry, Inc.  “In is haste, Judge Haddock has thrown out the clear legislative intent written in to Florida’s statutes and substituted his own idea of what he thinks the legislature must have meant based on a debate by a few legislators. Floor debate that happened over a decade after the law actually passed! This flies in the face of the Firearms Preemption Enforceability laws we passed just last year.”

No judge has the authority to take few moments of Floor Debate and use them to replace and ignore clear statutory language, the legislature’s expressed (written) intent, and even provisions of the Florida Constitution. We look forward to our appeal of this monstrously unprecedented example of judicial activism.

Just yesterday the Kentucky Supreme Court overturned an eerily similar decision.  The Kentucky ruling was based on laws that were based on, and are almost identical to, Florida’s gun laws.  The right to securely store a handgun in vehicles parked in student parking has been upheld in Kentucky using many of the same arguments we have put forth.

Early on April 26^th 2012, before the Kentucky decision was even known, we notified the lower court that we are appealing this case to the First District Court of Appeal in Tallahassee.  Decisions of the DCA are binding throughout the state and we will now move to resolve over 15 years of widespread abuse by Florida colleges and universities of the right to bear arms.

Docket Overview: Lower Court Case Number: 2011-CA-08012
Duval County Clerk of the Circuit Court

Lower Court Filings: 

10/03/2011 Plaintiffs' Original Complaint
11/10/2011 Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Injunction
12/15/2011 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss
01/04/2012 Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint
01/25/2012 Defendants' Second Motion to Dismiss
01/27/2012 Defendants' Memo of Law Opposing Temporary Injunction
03/21/2012 Plaintiffs' Notice of Priority Case & Motion for Ruling
03/22/2012 Order Denying Temp. Injunction
03/26/2012 Plaintiffs' Memo of Law Opposing Motion to Dismiss
04/03/2012 Final Order Granting Motion to Dismiss
04/26/2012 Plaintiffs' Notice of Appeal

Docket Overview: Appellate Court Case Number:  1D12-2174
Florida First District Court of Appeal Docket

Appellate Court Filings:

04/27/2012 Plaintiffs' Notice of Appeal
07/10/2012 Record on Appeal
08/31/2012 Plaintiffs' Appellate Brief