Florida’s Ban Assault Weapons NOW! Gets Financial Boost for ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Effort

ban assault weapons now


Ban Assault Weapons Now (BAWN) is trying to get a constitutional amendment on the 2020 ballot in Florida to outlaw “assault weapons” that are capable of firing more than ten rounds. The group received more than half a million dollars from small donors in August according to records from the Florida Department of State.

As reported by Fox 35 News out of Orlando . . .

Ban Assault Weapons NOW, the political committee behind the proposed constitutional amendment, drew more than 28,000 contributions totaling $595,000 in August, by far the largest amount in a single month since the committee was launched in March 2018. Nearly 12,000 of the contributions were $5 or less, the campaign report shows. Also, more than 5,000 were for $10.

With 105,000 valid petition signatures submitted so far, the group has surpassed the number needed to spur a Florida Supreme Court review of the proposed amendment’s wording. The committee needs 766,200 valid signatures to make it onto the 2020 ballot.

For those who aren’t familiar with them, BAWN is a political action committee that’s supported both by a number of Republicans (like Rep. Brian Mast and mega Trump donor Al Hoffman Jr.) as well as your usual gaggle of anti-gun Democrats.

August’s largest contribution — $50,000, on Aug. 23 — came from Americans for Gun Safety Now, a political organization based in Virginia that was founded by Al Hoffman, a former finance chairman for the Republican National Committee who lives in North Palm Beach.

Here’s a rundown of what BAWN is trying to do via their proposed ballot initiative. First, let’s look at the broad definition of an “assault weapon” under the BAWN ballot initiative.

a) Assault Weapons – For purposes of this subsection, any semiautomatic rifle or shotgun capable of holding more than ten (10) rounds of ammunition at once, either in a fixed or detachable magazine, or any other ammunition-feeding device. This subsection does not apply to handguns.

b) Semiautomatic – For purposes of this subsection, any weapon which fires a single projectile or a number of ball shots through a rifled or smooth bore for each single function of the trigger without further manual action required.

Here’s what they determine a magazine to be.

c) Ammunition-feeding device – For purposes of this subsection, any magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device for a firearm.

Basically, it’s your typical “high capacity” magazine ban. Anything that holds more than 10 rounds would be verboten. So how do sections A, B, and C come together?

If the ballot initiative passes, a Ruger 10/22 or Marlin Model 60 would be banned. Why? Because the Marlin comes from the factory with a 15-round magazine tube and the Ruger can accept magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.

The petition is so vague that Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody is currently trying to keep it off the ballot. And, of course, the gun grabbers are crying foul, claiming that Moody’s objections to the proposed Amendment are invalid.

Moody has four specific complaints.

First, she states that the ballot title and summary are defective in not being broad enough. The title refers to “defined assault weapons.” The summary defines assault weapons as “semiautomatic rifles and shotguns or detachable magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition at once, either in a fixed or detachable magazine, or any other ammunition-feeding device.”

She complains that the fact that this “would ban almost every semiautomatic long gun” is not explained. Her objection is not valid. The whole point of a semiautomatic gun is to be able to fire multiple shots, almost all of which can fire more than 10 rounds (with the exception of the traditional double-barrel shotgun), so neither the title nor the summary is misleading.

The second complaint is that the title and summary do not explain that someone who owns a banned gun when the amendment takes effect is exempt from the ban only if the owner registers it with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. This objection also is not valid.

The title states that the amendment bans possession of “defined assault weapons,” while the summary states that the exemption “requires the registration of assault weapons lawfully possessed” before the effective date of the amendment. It is hardly a fatal defect that neither says with whom the registration must be filed.

The third objection is that, while the amendment has a 30-day delay between adoption and taking effect, the “ballot language” does not state that during that period a person can buy an assault-type weapon and come within the pre-owned exemption. Again, this is not a valid objection.

The ballot language does provide for the 30-day delay in the effective date. This necessarily means a weapon bought in the delay period is not banned by the amendment. There is no reason why the ballot language must expressly state this.

Moody’s last objection is that the amendment not only provides that a violation of the amendment is a third-degree felony, the Legislature can increase the penalty. Although the ballot language does expressly provide for the possible increase, the summary states only that the amendment creates “criminal penalties” for a violation of it.

The summary clearly puts voters on notice that it provides for the plural “penalties,” not just one penalty, and one of those penalties is that the Legislature can increase it.

BAWN sees the recent cash infusion from small donors as a moral victory in their beliefs that Floridians and Americans as a whole are eager to trample on the Second Amendment.

Again from Fox 35 News . . .

“Our strong August fundraising is a message from Floridians — and concerned individuals across the country — that we simply have to do something about the terror and devastation that military-style assault weapons can cause in our communities. Unfortunately, the catalyst for this outpouring of support was largely the back-to-back incidents of mass murder we all witnessed in horror over a single weekend in August,” Ben Pollara, senior adviser to Ban Assault Weapons NOW, told The News Service of Florida in a text message Thursday.


  1. avatar d says:

    What is their email so we can tell them to FO?

  2. avatar D says:

    I am soliciting donation for BLN (Ban Liberals NOW)

  3. avatar Mad Max says:

    “And, of course, the gun grabbers are crying foul, claiming that Moody’s objections to the proposed Amendment are invalid.”

    The amendment is invalid because it violates the 2nd Amendment as promulgated in Heller because the arms in question are “in common use”.

  4. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

    As I type this I look across the room and see a Galil ARM in 5.56 mm. It has a 35 round magazine loaded with Federal tactical ammunition. There are ten more loaded magazines at hand. I will not sell it to the government in a “buy back.” I will not surrender it. I will not register it. Period. The government can kiss my lily white ass.

    1. avatar Heywood says:

      If the government really wants it they’ll just take it from you, coward.

      1. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

        Heywood, no they won’t. First, I won’t surrender it. Second, if the soldiers and LEOs I served with are indicative of most they will refuse to try to violate the constitution. Last, why would you call me a coward? I spent my entire adult life putting myself in harm’s way. I’ve been scared. You’re crazy if you’re not, but I always pushed through with the mission. Call me a coward in front of my friends. When they finish laughing they’ll kick the brown shit out of your ass.

        1. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

          Heywood, here’s a tale for you. My ex and I split back in ’09. After the dust settled one of the guys I worked with approached me. Buck is a Sgt and K-9 officer. Buck, “I know you didn’t want a divorce, but we’re glad it worked out okay.” Me, puzzled, “What do you mean?” Buck, “We were afraid she might take out an injunction.” Me, “What!? I never raised a hand to her since I met her in the spring of ’84.” Buck, “I know, but you know how it goes sometimes.” Me, “Yeah, so what was the problem?” Buck, “We were afraid to try and take your guns if she did.” Me, “I wouldn’t have let you take them.” Buck, “I know. That’s what we were afraid of.” Now my children stayed with me. I finished raising them. They’re grown and gone. I buried Dad a few days ago. Mom’s not far behind. I have zero debt. Let the government come for my weapons. See what happens next.

        2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Sorry for your loss, Gadsden. I just buried my last remaining (very elderly) grandparent myself. It’s a sobering event when the last member of an entire generation of your bloodline is gone.

          Same as you, my children are all grown and gone. House is paid off, vehicle paid off, zero debt. Aside from some traveling, I’ve done pretty much everything I wanted to do when I was younger, so the bucket list is short now. At my age, I’m still young enough to be in my prime, but old enough to appreciate what I have, who I am, where I come from, and what I stand for. Wise enough to determine what’s not worth getting upset over, and what’s worth fighting (and living, and dying) for.

          It’s easy for all of us to type “Molon Labe, bitchez” into our keyboards, but if things really got that bad, I will do what’s necessary to preserve the future for my grandchildren as best as I can.

          As I’ve said here before, I pray to God it never comes to that.

        3. avatar Erik Weisz says:

          Sorry to hear of your loss.
          If SHTF, I’m sure I’m not the only one who will come and watch your flanks.

      2. avatar Merle 0 says:

        Shut up heywood you toolbag. Who’s gonna come take all our guns? You? Ha!? You do realize most military and LE are big bad evil conservatives and gun owners right?

      3. avatar Chris Brown says:

        Heywood the hack attempts to strike again…..

      4. avatar JoshtheBruce says:

        The cowards are the ones that turn them in, asshole.

    2. avatar Merle 0 says:

      Nice choice. I wish I would’ve picked up a Galil back when they were cheaper.

      1. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

        Marlene O, not cheaper. Less expensive. There’s nothing cheap about a Galil.

        1. avatar Merle 0 says:

          Good point.

        2. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

          Merle. Damn spell check.

        3. avatar Jabberwockey says:

          I love Galils ( SA R4 and R5 too ) but can you still get replacement parts for it like hammer springs, firing pins, etc ?

        4. avatar Merle 0 says:

          Galil’s are still in production, both the new version and original, so imagine there’s a way to get spare parts. There just more expensive then they used to be, due to the lack of surplus rifles and parts from back when it was a primary rifle of the IDF. Similar to the FAL or G3 now. Rifles and parts are still produced and sold in the private sector, but having been phased out as primary infantry rifles, there’s no longer an inexpensive surplus. Except for G3 magazines. Those things you can still buy by the pallet full.

        5. avatar Jabberwockey says:

          I tend to obssess over logistics. I’ve got loads of spare parts for my ARs and AKs even though I’ll probably never need them.

          I love Galils, never owned one though. Had a friend who owned a Galil ARM chambered in .308. Really a cool rifle.

  5. avatar Grumpy F'er says:

    1) This bans shotguns as well. Here in WA, SUPER repressive and getting more so every vote, currently has no new and unusual restriction on shotguns.

    2) “CAN POSSIBLY ACCEPT.” So, the 107 year old 1911 (7, 8 and 10 round mags) is ALSO banned because someone, somewhere, sometime, manufactured one of these:


    Slippery slope. Hey Mr. Range-Owner-Businessman! Wanna keep your license and your business open? Better be checking on what’s coming through your doors…

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Wrong–it only bans rifles and shotguns not pistols. though those will be next if this succeeds. What is a valid objection is that it bans ALL semiauto rifles other than internal magazine rifles (aka Garand) that cannot accept a mag (or clip as the case may be)with more than ten rounds. But the M1 Carbine is history. And the Ruger Mini class.

      1. avatar Grumpy F'er says:

        “though those will be next if this succeeds.”

        Bingo. Even if it doesn’t. “Compromise” means they take and we give.

        1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “And it doesn’t ban these.”

          Yes, it does.

          It comes standard with a binary trigger, and that has been illegal since the Florida bump-stock ban a few months back.

          Do you have any further non-wisdom to regal us with?

      2. avatar Karl says:

        AR pistols?

  6. avatar Ark says:

    In any way restricting a constitutionally protected right should be an automatic disqualifier for a ballot initiative. The constitution exists to exempt rights from majority opinion.

    1. avatar Dr. Blue says:

      You would think that even the Florida Constitution would keep this off the ballot. That is the inherent problem with initiative ballot constitutional Amendments. Stupid crap has ended up in the constitution due to these.

  7. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Constant vigilance is required if we intend to remain a free country. This isn’t the first, and won’t be the last, attempt to destroy our freedoms. Keep punching.

    1. avatar SoCalJack says:

      Roger that. Keep abreast of old enemies to the Constitution. Detect, identify and track new enemies. Engage smartly, I.e. inform moderate voters of the truth.

  8. avatar RB says:

    I’m almost surprised that they are not trying to get everything except single shot banned using the false idea that that was the only type of firearm in 1776. Too ignorant to know about puckle guns, Ferguson Rifle etc.

    If they get 10 round limit the next step is 5 or 1 then none.

  9. avatar Dale Menard says:

    If only we could write a law that all criminals would obey, but would not have to be enforced.

  10. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

    This is the kind of thing that really worries me. If it’s on the ballot most people vote for it. In 2018 my county in Florida said yes to having the highest sales tax in the state. 8.25% These ballot measures should not be allowed

  11. avatar Gordon in MO says:

    I have a micro penis and banning my guns will only make me more inadequate and therefore angrier.

    1. avatar Mike V says:

      Well your experience is entirely yours.

    2. avatar Someone says:

      Thanks for sharing, but we don’t care.

  12. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    And if Florida or fedzilla passed a constitutional amendment which prohibits child-bearing (because people are a scourge on the planet — devouring resources and polluting everything), we should all be good little citizens, immediately stop procreating, and terminate all current and future pregnancies, right? After all, if we can just stop producing human beings, we can finally — FINALLY I TELL YOU! — halt climate change and right all the past wrongs, or something.

    When government criminalizes life — including preserving life (self-defense) — it ceases to be righteous. But who cares about what is righteous? All that matters is whether or not I can download multiple ultra-high definition 4k video streams on demand, right?

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      “All that matters is whether or not I can download multiple ultra-high definition 4k video streams on demand, right?”

      If you’re speaking of tentacle porn and romcoms then yes, that truly is all that matters. Hell, the romcoms are really just a bennie.

  13. avatar dph says:

    The ̶l̶i̶b̶e̶r̶t̶y̶ gun hating trolls are really getting thick around here of late, they’re like fruit flies around a bucket full of apples except the flies are more intelligent.

  14. avatar Double Ought Spy says:

    Hey hermano, welcome back. I’ve truly missed your articles. Thanks for this one!

  15. avatar BFG says:

    What part of shall not be infringed do these “legislators” not understand? How about instead of dumping money into these invasive and unconstitutional laws, we do something about the real problem and bring back institutions for the mentally ill? The guns themselves don’t do harm to people, people harm other people.

  16. avatar Sam Hill says:

    I noticed a fatal flaw in their bs, there was no exemption for le’s or military.

    1. avatar Molot545 says:

      I can only hope that no exemption is forthcoming. That is the strongest poison pill I can imagine. Hopefully the legislature, when they start to hear police chiefs complaining, are unable to modify the law. This will put the police unions on our side. Perhaps a few soldiers getting arrested on maneuvers by local police would speed things up.

  17. avatar strych9 says:

    One of these days people will realize that “can accept” means literally any firearm.

    Regardless of someone’s feelings on magazine capacity this amounts to a de facto ban on firearms because it’s only a matter of time until they ‘deploy the meaning’ of the language and say that the definition ‘alludes to possibility’ meaning that unless it’s barred by the laws of physics it ‘can’ be done given the right circumstances and therefore, since the gun ‘can’ be modified to accept more than 10 rounds, it’s banned.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “One of these days people will realize that “can accept” means literally any firearm.”

      They know it, and they consider it a feature.

      (Tentacle porn. I was curious, so I searched, and… I am flabbergasted. The Japanese woman looked so *cute*…)

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        Generally speaking if I say something like that and you don’t already know what it is your preferred search engine is probably not your friend in terms of finding out.

        I mean unless you like having your horizons expanded… forcefully.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          A side note:

          I’m waiting for some Japanese weirdo to remake 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. Kirk Douglass is over 100 now but there’s some serious room to work turning that into some freaky Asian porn.

          It will happen. I have faith in Japanese strangeness fueled by CoFugoo and booze.

  18. avatar PATRON49IFT says:

    The answer is NO. Do not give on anything. The discussion is over. Are you going to ban cars which kill millions more or alcohol or beef or whatever? No, you are trying to chip away at a constitutionally guaranteed right. How about we limit the 1st Amendment, or the 4th Amendment; you know to make them more reasonable. Would you go along with that? I thought not.

  19. avatar Paul Hill says:

    It is only going to get worse in Florida. New Yorkers are moving here wholesale and bringing their liberal attitudes with them . I witness it all the time.

  20. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

    “a) Assault Weapons – (clip) – This subsection does not apply to handguns.”

    So, an 8 – inch barrel AR pistol build with an arm brace is good-to-go?

  21. avatar Jaque says:

    Floridians who value their second amendment rights and freedoms should prepare to leave the state. Floridas population is rapidly changing as the far left rich and powerful gun grabbers move from high tax states of the northeast to Floridas low tax snow free gun friendly state.
    Add the increasing latino numbers in Florida who vote left and soon Florida will become another Blue state with a communist government and communist majority population who hate guns and want to deny others the second amendment.

    1. avatar Merle 0 says:

      The problem is if Florida falls, GA and the carloninas are both next. We can’t afford to lose the south in this fight. The mid west and west won’t be able to hang on alone without them. Keeping Florida red, even if it’s a light red and sometimes purple state, is very important to the overall National fight.

      1. avatar Merle 0 says:


  22. avatar Jerry Lee Woodie says:

    I really hope that the people of Florida keep this gun grab nonsense off the ballot. Gun control only leads to more gun control.

  23. avatar Jerry Lee Woodie says:

    Don’t let Florida become another California where liberals breed like flies. Floridians, take back your state before it’s too late!

  24. avatar Tom forrest says:

    So 2020 is almost upon us, and they have less than fourteen percent of the signatures that they need. What is the deadline?

  25. avatar anon says:

    –I must be failing -reading and comprehension- section a states not for handguns—-section b classifies any gun that fires one shot per trigger pull as semi automatic—-does this include revolvers, or derringers——-who thinks of this dribble——maybe all this money should be used for learning better talking ‘American’ so I could understand it more gooder—

  26. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    I guess we need to start a group called PAAWN.
    (Protect Anti Assault Weapons Now)

  27. avatar bryan1980 says:

    God forbid this makes it on to the ballot, but if it does, don’t move away; stand your ground and do not comply. There’s getting to be fewer and fewer places to run to.

  28. avatar BillC says:

    Laws only work when you obey them. Do not obey any law that violates your second amendment rights. RESIST the liberal zombie horde.

  29. It has to be signed by governor if it did pass. Think he actually will

  30. avatar Thomas Wolf says:

    TLDR all the comments. Surely some law abiding citizens will register their firearms. What I find missing is how they will force known criminals to register their illegal firearms and or confiscate them. It’s interesting how they forget that aspect of society.
    I heard another mass shooting had happened. Oh wait, it was in Chicago so it doesn’t matter to the left.

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