Gun Rights Hero of the Day: FL State Representative Matt Gaetz

 Florida State Representative Matt Gaetz (courtesy tampabay.com)

“West Palm Beach could soon have a new shooting range and gun shop in a convenient location close to downtown,” bizpacreview.com reports. “But Mayor Jeri Mouio was clear that she doesn’t support the idea – because she doesn’t like guns.” OK, so Jeri’s not our hero. I submit her submission to the gun control industrial complex because it stands in stark contrast to that of Sunshine State State Representative Matt Gaetz. First, Matt’s antagonist, [via tampbay.com]: “Florida House Speaker Will Weatherford announced Friday that he will order hearings this fall on the state’s ‘stand your ground’ law, a victory for the young protesters known as the Dream Defenders who have spent the past two weeks protesting at the Capitol. Weatherford assigned the task of chairing the hearings to a staunch supporter of the law, Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fort Walton Beach.’I don’t support changing one damn comma of the ‘stand your ground’ law,’ Gaetz said Friday. ‘It would be reactionary and dangerous to make Floridians less safe to pacify uninformed protesters.'” Matt’s well aware that the Florida legislature already reviewed their Stand Your Ground laws in the immediate aftermath of the George Zimmerman arrest. They didn’t change one damn comma of the law then, either. So when he says  he welcomes Stand Your Ground hearings . . .

It doesn’t mean what the Dream Defenders want it to mean.

“I want to have hearings; it’s a good idea,” Gaetz said. “Right now, the only voices on ‘stand your ground’ are coming from the radical left. I want an opportunity to give a full-throated defense of the law.” . . .

“Our evaluation of its effectiveness should be guided by objective information, not by political expediency. Does the law keep the innocent safer? Is it being applied fairly? Are there ways we can make this law clearer and more understandable?”

There’s your common sense approach to gun laws. Good on ya Matt. [h/t John]

comments

  1. avatar Gtfoxy says:

    If 41 states have a ratified SYG Law it is a Constitutional Amendment and is applicable to every state is it not?

    34 is 2/3 majority and that makes it a state ratified ammendment.

    1. avatar Paul53 says:

      If it’s proposed as an amendment to The Constitution and enough states support it, it becomes part of the constitution. If it isn’t proposed as an amendment, then no go for The Constitution.

    2. avatar Craig says:

      Amendments require someone to propose a bill in Congress. If all of the states adopt a certain law, its still not Federal law until a bill works its way through the House, the Senate, and Obama’s desk. I don’t think a “stand your ground” bill would be an amendment either, it would either be an addition to the 2A or it would become a statute.

    3. avatar JoshuaS says:

      You are trying to make some obscure joke? I refuse to believe that an American could be this ignorant of the constitution. But maybe you are a foreigner rather than a flunk-out from high school government. So I will explain

      1. Amendments must be proposed as such- to propose an amendment two ways are possible
      a. National convention can propose an amendment by a 2/3rds majority
      b. Congress can propose an amendment by a 2/3rd majority

      Only 1.b. has ever been done
      2. Amendments are then submitted for ratification, either by:
      a. Approval of the legislatures of 3/4 of the States (38 currently)
      b. Approval by State conventions in 3/4ths of the States (has happened before, but very rare)

      Unless stated otherwise in the amendment, between proposal and ratification there is no time limit. Hence the 27th amendment was actually one of the 12 proposed by Congress for the Bill of Rights, but was only certified as ratified 200 years later, in 1992

      If it were the case that states having similar laws some how constituted the Constitution (as if it were not a written constitution but a living one) then we would have to conclude several things

      1. E.g. if you civics understanding was at all even close to how things work, then it was unconstitutional for anyone to carry a gun, as the vast majority of states outlawed that for a long time

      2. Until 3/4ths or 2/3rds of the states changed their laws, states that allowed it (like California ironically) would be unconstitutionally allowing you to bear arms

      3. The magic moment of that 2/3rds majority state passing an unconstitutional law would render the laws constitutional, but the laws of other states unconstitutional.

      Oh, and the 2nd amendment would mean literally nothing. Enough states pass a law, it would change the constitution.

      Thankfullly, the way it works is absolutely nothing like what you wrote.

      1. avatar Gtfoxy says:

        My edit didn’t take the first time.

        I understand it just fine if you were talking to me.

        http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Five_of_the_United_States_Constitution

  2. avatar Paul53 says:

    Attaboy Matt. It’s just a matter of self defense which nobody should be denied.

  3. avatar pk in AZ says:

    Unfortunately the anti gunners, left wingnuts, maigers, al sharpton, jesse jackson, the family of the juvenile delinquent who assaulted George Zimmerman etc. have been brainwashing the sheeple of the U.S. with this whole “stand your ground”, even though it wasn’t used as GZ’s defense…..

    1. avatar wa_2a says:

      The reason we have a representative, democratic republic is to keep the majority (them) from oppressing the minority (us).

      1. avatar Dyspeptic says:

        I don’t thing that “they” are the majority on this issue. And it isn’t a “representative democratic republic” that protects our rights. What really protects our rights is a piece of paper called the U.S. Constitution and our righteous willingness to battle it’s enemies, kicking a$$, taking names and giving no quarter along the way, just like our revolutionary forefathers.

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      “maigers”

      I just coined the term “MAIGgot”; please feel free to use it.

      1. avatar Blue says:

        MAIGgots, that is a good one!

      2. Woo! Hoo! MAIGgots! Got it! Thats a good one, William. Will be sure to give references.

    3. avatar Blue says:

      FAMU even had an AME preacher addressing students at summer commencement. He told them that even when they wear suites, they will be profiled. He mentioned boy armed with skittles being murdered and that the new grads needed to help repeal SYG.

  4. avatar Nine says:

    Proud to be a Floridian.

    SO.DAMN.TIRED of the Dream Defender douchebags.

    1. avatar Blue says:

      The core group of the Dream Pretenders including Agnew are paid by SEIU and similar groups. They are professional agitators and activists.

  5. avatar Andrew says:

    You guys should run a story about how the FL Attorney Gen is delaying a decision on Dale Norman V. State. Basically he was harassed because when the cop told him to put his hands up his heater was visible. The decision in this case could make open carry legal.

  6. avatar Jeff says:

    The mayor in question, Jeri Mouio, is a New York transplant to Florida and a democrat, so – no surprise.

  7. avatar Matt in FL says:

    We’ll see how it shakes out. It’s possible that the hearings were announced just to placate the vocal, but they won’t actually happen. If that turns out not be the case, then at least we’ve got this guy running them.

  8. avatar Mediocrates says:

    Whining about SYG laws is just more of the same-o, trying to protect the deviants in society. It is important though to listen to everyone’s cares and concerns. There is healing in that, even if nothing comes of it.

  9. avatar chip says:

    Matt is my local FL Congressman…I don’t personally know him but did vote for him. Many may not know this but his father Don is president of the FL Senate and will most likely be FL Governor in another term or two. They are both pretty good conservative guys! We are lucky to have each of them in the North Florida area.

  10. avatar jrflesch says:

    In regards to this new range… I do NOT support it either because it is going to be government owned and run facility.

    The county told many prospect range owners that they could NOT build a range in the county and there was no place that it could be done. NOW the county is taking a piece of land that has over 100 million dollars of tax payer money sunk into it and donating it to FWC. Essentially screwing tax payers. The land was first supposed to be developed by Scripps medical research company and when that fell through, bought by the water authority for 30-50 million. At least selling it to the water authority would have recovered some of the money spent in prepping the land for other pursuits. Unfortunately, the state put together a proposal that was full of inflated numbers and down right lies and now is going to compete with private enterprise and be a huge threat to many privately owned ranges in the area that are already struggling in a tough South Florida economy.

  11. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  12. avatar Ardent says:

    Not only the right attitude and facts, but plain talk to boot. It’s enough to make me want to move to Fla so I can vote for him! Go Matt Go!

  13. avatar Blue says:

    Philip B. Agnew, one of the Dream Pretenders is a black power punk funded by SEIU and similar groups. He was also backed by Holder’s bunch when they were in Sanford. There isn’t as many chapters of The Dream Pretenders in Florida. It is the same punks shuffled and bused around. Many of them aren’t even from Florida. Agnew is from Chicago. He went to FAMU and graduated in 2008.

  14. avatar E. Jones says:

    That quote is phenomenal. I am so tired of the reflexive kowtowing to “the voice of the people” that is endemic in America today. All it takes is a few uninformed, ignorant, or willfully malicious twits to organize some protest, and then the media gleefully reports about the “widespread outrage,” the “uproar,” the “popular outcry,” and the “groundswell of grassroots support” and tries to convince everyone that everyone *else* is really upset about some terrible thing…. when in reality it’s a few wacko leftists trying to impose their narrow-minded views on the rest of the country. Good on this congressman for not paying lip service to the idiotic protesters, and for having the courage to say, in a public way that could be quoted, that they’re uninformed and full of it.

  15. avatar nice guns says:

    Thus to many women in government, and I’m sure the revolutionary war( which we think can never happen here in our Utopian America) didn’t have many women standing in battle either, that is until the British killed one of there children. And by the way Jeri, the way to handle that is to fight, not ban guns, Women?

  16. avatar NVGunner says:

    Keep an eye on this guy. He’s a freakin’ genius…. literally. We should be glad he’s in our corner.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email