The University of Florida is being sued by Florida Carry Inc. over its weapons policies. In the wake of the recent court decision regarding the storage of guns in vehicles on campus, UF amended its policies in that regard, but Sean Caranna, Executive Director of Florida Carry, says that doesn’t go far enough. His organization is challenging the university’s policy on guns in university-owned housing. At issue is whether university housing counts as part of campus or if it’s considered a student’s home. . . .
giving students the right to store guns there. “No one is holding class in their car, no one is holding class in their dorm, no one is holding class in off-campus apartments owned by the university,” Caranna said. “Those are not part of the education environment.” UF has filed a motion to dismiss the suit, saying Florida Carry doesn’t have standing, because none of its members are affected by the university’s policy. So if you know a gunny who lives on campus at UF, get ’em to join Florida Carry!
Your Lockdown of the Day™ comes from Vancouver, Washington. Police say two people were shot and killed at a Benjamin Moore distribution center today. One of them was the shooter. Police believe there was a relationship between the two people, but could not confirm it. Due to the shooting and investigation, an elementary school was locked down. It was a half mile away, and the incident was apparently over in just a couple minutes, but locking down is what we do now. I live across the street from a school, and I try not to slam my doors too loudly. [h/t: Pascal]
An Iowa Senate subcommittee approved a bill today that would lower the allowable age limit for possession of a handgun under certain circumstances. Under current law, a person under 21 but older than 14 may possess a pistol or revolver and ammunition if they are under the direct supervision of a parent or guardian, or while receiving instruction from another adult. The proposed bill would reduce the lower limit to 12 years old. That’s good and all, but I think the bigger issue is… Can someone who is between 18 and 21 really not even possess a handgun without an adult over 21 present? Really? If so, that’s the law that needs to be fixed.
Last Thursday I told you about a DGU in the parking lot of Eastern Florida State College where a man who was being attacked retrieved a firearm from his vehicle and shot at the two men attacking him, wounding one of them. That same day, Florida Today wrote in their article that the man may be subject to expulsion based in EFSC’s policy against firearms in vehicles, in spite of the recent court decision allowing them. “EFSC Spokesman John Glisch said the losing side of that decision has asked the court to rehear the case, and his school is keeping their ban in place until the issue is resolved.” He’s mistaken. The decision was handed down on December 10th, and approximately 10 days later, UNF formally said they would not pursue an appeal. Some folks who read TTAG and also attend EFSC reached out to Florida Carry, Inc, who said they’d get on it.
Today, Florida Today has another article where the college backpedaled a bit on their earlier comments. “We’re reaching out to him to see what we can do,” EF President Jim Richey said. “He has a special place at our college, so we’re concerned about how he’s doing and how he’s feeling, and hopefully he feels well enough to continue classes.” Not mentioned in that story is the fact that Florida Carry has filed suit against EFSC for their illegal weapons ban. I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: If you live in Florida, Florida Carry needs your support.
Are we tired of the GLOCK-brand GLOCK 42 yet? Iraqveteran8888 has an in-depth rundown on it. I’m a little tired, but I thought this was pretty good.
.
Even if you don’t rock a residence in the sunshine state, Florida Carry needs your support. One states piss poor lelsglation has a nasty way of sneaking accross boarders.
Especially with all the Bostonian and New Yorker retirees. Speaking of which, I’m supprisd that Florida’s gun laws have survived this long given all the previously mentioned people who retire there.
Maybe too many of them die of old age before elections?
Thankfully, most retirees don’t care as long as your grass is between 2″ and 3″ high, your home is the correct color of tan according to the HOA bylaws, and your trash cans are not visible from the street, except for trash day.
I am an ex-pat New Yorker who moved to Fla. in ’87. Bought my first handgun in ’88 with no hassle at all. Not all of us agree with what is occurring up there. I thank the Lord that I came down. There are still some patriots left.
Unfortunately, true campus carry won’t come until colleges are told by our judiciary point-blank that they MUST respect the student’s right to carry, not just legally but also under their “internal” judicial system.
For those not familiar with modern university conduct review, most major colleges have a “student conduct” code which specifies policies and regulations applicable to the student body, rules like No Kegs On Campus, no animals in university buildings, etc .Almost every college has a blurb forbidding student transport of arms on their person . Even if the legislative codes at the state level permit CCW on a college campus, a student who violated the university regulations would still face expulsion or academic punishment under their school’s conduct regulations.
That, at best, means a black mark on their record which may deny them eligibility for scholarships, athletic participation, etc. At worst, it means 4+ years of schoolwork and tens of thousands of dollars down the drain.
If he would only have done the responsible thing and let them kill him……
Gee, they have private, modern “Jim Crow” policies. I wonder if DOJ would be interested. /sarc
I lived off campus from day 1 at UF because I couldn’t keep guns in campus housing. I also remember carrying was almost impossible because I was constantly running to campus for some reason or another. The sad part is that the rest of the area is pretty gun friendly with several nice ranges 10-15 minutes away. Being back in south florida I miss those short trips to the range 🙁
enough with the Glock 42. you guys writing these articles are pushing it to the point of being cool to hate it. YES.. it’s a .380 which isn’t as powerful as 9mm. YES.. it’s as reliable as any other Glock (unless you’re a limp wristed gun blogger). I’ve even modified followers to accept 7rds and still zero failures.. laser beam accuracy.. comfortable, convenient carry…. still. the hearsay in all these articles doesn’t sound up to the standards of a blog called TheTruthAboutGuns.
please. no more Glock 42 commentary. move on to the next cool thing to hate. like titties.. or fast cars.
Who hates titties and fast cars? Honestly though, the Glock 42 isn’t a bad gun for first time gun owners from what I have heard (so long as you don’t use 100 grain +p specialty ammo). It fires a caliber that is large enough to be suitable for self defense (not armed response) but won’t create so much recoil as to induce flinching. The size also makes it easier to hit with than some of the smaller .380’s (like the LCP). However, I’m not bashing the LCP. In my concealed carry class, there was a woman shooting an LCP that out shot me with my Glock 30sf.
no one hates titties and fast cars! that’s my point. but if something is popular, it’s cool to hate it. Glock handguns are popular for a reason. they work. bitching about a useful tool in evey mention of it is absurd. the only reason the TTAG writers are tired of it is because they can’t stop talking about it.
I conceal carry a G17 everyday. if I’m just stepping outside to smoke, take out the trash, or running up to the corner store it’s nice to have that same reliability and accuracy in a small package. it’s a “get to safety” gun, yet it’s being compared to other guns outside of it’s class on TTAG.
the supposed malfunctions with buffalo bore 1000gr +PP+++ are a result of limp wristing. but the bigger flaw problem is the thought of even using that ammo. no .380 cartridge is going to have “knock down power”. what it lacks in mass, it makes up for in adequate penetration to organs with ball ammo. and guess what?! no malfunctions with ball ammo.
don’t make comparisons to other guns outside of its class, and don’t complain about ammunition failures to judge a gun. they posted a video of malfunctions but no mention of the many target rounds that ran smoothly. I’m not going to shoot a 50BMG out of my 12g and bitch about it. there’s no mention of the Glock 42 being +P rated anyway, to my knowledge.
I’d like to meet that lady and cautiously shake her hand. I’ve got an LCP with which I couldn’t hit a barn at over 21 feet. Well, that’s an exaggeration, but I’m hardly punching holes in dimes with the thing. The LCP will never be known for accuracy and yet there are those people who can manage it just fine from 40 yards out. Freaks, the lot of them. But that’s just envy speaking.
I know what you mean. best I can manage is a dinner plate sized group at 7 yards with an LCP or similar .380s. yet somehow with the Glock 42 my groups are baseball sized at twice that distance. that certainly inspires confidence considering the need to distance yourself from a deadly threat.
I have an LCP I’m thinking of replacing with an LCR. Shooting an LCP is just punishment, I hate practicing with it. HATE IT. Took it to the range 3 weeks ago and 50 standard pressure rounds darn near bruised my palm. The CT is nice, but if I can’t get the darn trigger to pull straight back a fat lot of good the laser is doing. I can make A/0 hits on an IPSC out to 25 feet, but not rapidly. Shooting 50 rounds feels like a chore.
Sadly, the LCP does not cycle Atlanta Arms very well, but neither did my LC380 I had for about 10 minutes (got for the wife, the wife hated). I MIGHT get her one of these, but it’s tough to argue with an LCR.
Get em guys… get em.
OK, Iowa Senate, are all those Military people between 18 and 21 really not allowed to even possess a handgun without an adult over 21 present? Let’s get real here.
I was told that why we have Senior Non-Commissioned Officers (SNCOs).
At least the corporal/sergeants/petty officers usually provide “babysitting” services. My recruiter said not to get hurt.
/sarcasm off
Glock forty-what? Never heard of it
So am I reading this right? If you are under 14 you can’t shoot a pistol even with adult supervision? If so that is stupid as hell. I hope I am just too tired and my reading comprehension is suffering. I was shooting a .22 pistol when I was 8-9 and I think around 10 when I fired my first 9mm.
Title XVI Subtitle I 724.22 of the Iowa Statutes
724.22 Persons under twenty-one — sale, loan, gift, making available — possession.
1. Except as provided in subsection 3, a person who sells, loans, gives, or makes available a rifle or shotgun or ammunition for a rifle or shotgun to a minor commits a serious misdemeanor for a first offense and a class “D” felony for second and subsequent offenses.
2. Except as provided in subsections 4 and 5, a person who sells, loans, gives, or makes available a pistol or revolver or ammunition for a pistol or revolver to a person below the age of twenty-one commits a serious misdemeanor for a first offense and a class “D” felony for second and subsequent offenses.
3. A parent, guardian, spouse who is eighteen years of age or older, or another with the express consent of the minor’s parent or guardian or spouse who is eighteen years of age or older may allow a minor to possess a rifle or shotgun or the ammunition therefor which may be lawfully used.
4. A person eighteen, nineteen, or twenty years of age may possess a firearm and the ammunition therefor while on military duty or while a peace officer, security guard or correctional officer, when such duty requires the possession of such a weapon or while the person receives instruction in the proper use thereof from an instructor who is twenty-one years of age or older.
5. A parent or guardian or spouse who is twenty-one years of age or older, of a person fourteen years of age but less than twenty-one may allow the person to possess a pistol or revolver or the ammunition therefor for any lawful purpose while under the direct supervision of the parent or guardian or spouse who is twenty-one years of age or older, or while the person receives instruction in the proper use thereof from an instructor twenty-one years of age or older, with the consent of such parent, guardian or spouse.
6. For the purposes of this section, caliber .22 rimfire ammunition shall be deemed to be rifle ammunition.
7. It shall be unlawful for any person to store or leave a loaded firearm which is not secured by a trigger lock mechanism, placed in a securely locked box or container, or placed in some other location which a reasonable person would believe to be secure from a minor under the age of fourteen years, if such person knows or has reason to believe that a minor under the age of fourteen years is likely to gain access to the firearm without the lawful permission of the minor’s parent, guardian, or person having charge of the minor, the minor lawfully gains access to the firearm without the consent of the minor’s parent, guardian, or person having charge of the minor, and the minor exhibits the firearm in a public place in an unlawful manner, or uses the firearm unlawfully to cause injury or death to a person. This subsection does not apply if the minor obtains the firearm as a result of an unlawful entry by any person. A violation of this subsection is punishable as a serious misdemeanor.
[C97, §5004; C24, 27, 31, 35, 39, §12958; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77, §695.26; C79, 81, §724.22]
90 Acts, ch 1147, §7; 94 Acts, ch 1023, §119; 94 Acts, ch 1172, §56
So that’s a no to handgun possession between 18 & 21 then. That’s outstanding. Someone who lives there really ought to get to work on that.
“UF has filed a motion to dismiss the suit, saying Florida Carry does not have standing, because none of its members are affected by the university’s policy.” So, it’s okay to trample on a civil right, so long as the trampled don’t complain? Does this make it okay for me to post “no coloreds” in my store window, as long as no one of African descent bothers to sue me?
It’s a longstanding tenet (nearly a century) of the legal system that to file suit against someone, you have to have standing. You can’t just sue people willy-nilly if it doesn’t affect you. That’s why the UNF suit that broke open the campus vehicle storage law was brought by Florida Carry and Alexandria Lainez. It’s no secret that FC was doing the heavy lifting, but they only had standing to be involved in it because Lainez was a member. Now, whether she was a member for very long prior to the filing of the suit, I don’t know. Maybe she joined so they could file the suit. But that’s how it works.
It’s bad enough we have lawyers that profit on silly lawsuits, at least standing prevents it from happening without a client who is affected. Without that you’d see professional plaintiffs trying to go after any possible coin even when it has nothing to do with them.
So, yeah, think about the alternative before you get too incensed.
It seems like the NRA should be dealing with this or at least give out money to help out smaller organizations like the one FL that is doing all the work.
Alright, so what’s up with the “GLOCK-brand GLOCK” phrase that I see on pretty much any Glock article on here (and probably elsewhere)? Are there other off-brand Glock’s out there that Glock licenses their designs to, or is it a way to identify the “True Glock” vs. other copy-cats out there?
I’m fairly new to the firearms world (having only gotten my first about a year ago), so just trying to understand the reasoning behind that phrase. Seems rather redundant to the layman…
You really only hear it from me (here, anyway), and I got it from here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzFaSiV-i0g
I use it because it amuses me.
Glock was the prime mover on the polymer frame market with a striker fired real reliable inexpensive (relatively speaking) sidearm. Glock drops in ’82, Springfield starts importing the XD in ’99 and S&W had a series of pistols that a lawsuit actually required them to pay Glock a royalty on which lead to the M&P in 2005 or so (which they don’t have to pay Glock for). It’s really obvious when a gun is trying to compete with a Glock.
So the joke is if someone gets a striker fired polymer framed pistol “hey guys, check out my new [insert brand here] Glock!” If you look at the aesthetic (or lack thereof) cues designs like the XD lifted from the Glock it’s pretty obvious what the pistol was bench marked on. The new Sig 320 will likely be called a the new SIG SAUER Glock on one blog or another before all is said and done. Without fail, a Glock fan will chime in and say “Why not just buy the original?”
It’s like calling tissue “Kleenex” or a copier a “Xerox”, soda “Coke”, etc.
I’m tired of hearing about the G42…
Noted.
That’s one…
I am joining FL Carry next month, if not sooner. They are very proactive in challenging bad laws in court, and I think they’ve got a decent shot at getting a win in their open carry case before the FL Supremes.
The only context I really care to hear on the Glock 42 at this point is “Why a Glock 42 and not a S&W Shield 9, XDs9, PPS, etc?” In what context does a Glock 42 make sense over those proven pistols in 9, which if we’re honest is what most of us (myself included) wish the 42 was?
Weight is the only thing it seems to really have going for it and ease of shooting.
I kept a shotgun in my dorm room while at Florida. But that was way before anyone gave a shit.
Comments are closed.