_add-on a)1 RESOLUTION NO.
Add-on item a)
Sponsored by: Mayor Stoddard
3/6/18 City Commission Meeting
--------
2
3 A Resolution of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami,
4 Florida. authorizing and directing the City Attorney to join the lawsuit filed
5 by the City of Weston seeking a declaration that the provisions punishing
6 elected officials set forth in section 790.33, Florida Statutes, for violating the
7 preemption related to the regulation of firearms and ammunition are invalid.
8
9 WHEREAS, over the past several years there have been an unprecedented number of
10 mass shootings in American communities including, most recently, at Marjory Stoneman
11 Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida; and
12
13 WHEREAS, national and state leaders continue to fail to act to implement sensible gun
14 law reforms that are supported by a majority of the nation; and
15
16 WHEREAS, on January 22, 2013, the City Commission for the City of Weston adopted
17 Resolution No. 201303, urging the Florida Legislature to repeal certain sections of Florida
18 Statutes that prevent local governments from exercising their Home Rule Authority to regulate
19 and/or prohibit firearms in public parks and other local government-owned facilities and
20 property; and
21
22 WHEREAS, on April 7, 2014, the City Commission for the City of Weston adopted
23 Resolution No. 2014-34, supporting House Bill 305 and Senate Bill 492, which would have
24 amended Florida Statutes to permit a local government to exercise its Home Rule Authority to
25 regulate firearms and ammunition upon local government-owned property; and
26
27 WHEREAS, requests by the City of Weston to the Florida legislature to enact legislation
28 relating to firearms in City facilities and parks, or to allow the City to do so, have been
29 unsuccessful; and
30
31 WHEREAS, in Section 790.33, Florida Statutes, the State of Florida (a) declared that it
32 is occupying the whole field of regulation of firearms and ammunition, to the exclusion of all
33 existing and future county or city ordinances, regulations or rules, (b) prohibit the enactment of
34 any future ordinances or regulations "relating to firearms," and (c) creates potential liability for
35 monetary damages and removal from office for actions that violate s. 790.33; and
36
37 WHEREAS, Section 790.33 's use of the terms "relating to firearms" and "any measure,
38 directive, rule, enactment, order or policy promulgated," is extremely broad and vague, and
39 could apply to a panoply of measures that the City would like to consider enacting, including the
40 restricting of guns in City facilities and parks, the placing of signs relating to guns in City
41 facilities and parks, the regulation of gun accessories (such as holsters or bump stocks) or the
42 creating of "gun free zones" or "gun safe zones"; and
43
44 WHEREAS, the potential violation of the broad and vague preemption of firearm
45 regulation in Section 790.33, Florida Statutes, carries the risk of onerous and punitive
46 consequences, including but not limited to damages up to $100,000, assessment of attorney fees
Page 1 of 3
Add-on item a)
Sponsored by: Mayor Stoddard
3/6/18 City Commission Meeting
1 and court costs, fines up to $5,000 (for which the official may be personally liable), removal
2 from office by the Governor without due process of law, and a prohibition of the use of public
3 funds to payor reimburse the official for fines, damages or defense costs (collectively, the
4 "Onerous Preemption Penalties"); and
5
6 WHEREAS, the City Commission and its members fear taking any steps that could even
7 remotely be viewed as a violation of the preemption due to the Onerous Preemption Penalties
8 which creates a chilling effect upon City action and it prevents the City Commission from doing
9 its duty to provide for the safety and welfare of its citizens by protecting them against the
10 dangers of firearms; and
11
12 WHEREAS, the City Commission and its members desire to consider various reasonable
13 measures related to firearms, including the restriction of guns in City facilities and parks, the
14 placing of signs related to guns in City facilities and parks, the regulation of gun accessories
15 (such as holsters or bump stocks), the creation of "gun free zones" or "gun safe zones," or other
16 measures related to guns, but have refrained from doing so because they could possibly be
17 viewed as violating s. 790.33 and be subjected to the Onerous Preemption Penalties; and
18
19 WHEREAS, the Onerous Preemption Penalties strike at the core of the American system
20 of democratic representation; they suppress the voice of the local electorate through intimidation
21 of local elected officials; and
22
23 WHEREAS, the Onerous Preemption Penalties infringe on the free speech rights of the
24 City Commission and its members, and interfere with their ability to perform their official duties;
25 and
26
27 WHEREAS, the Onerous Preemption Penalties infringe upon the legislative immunity
28 that the members of the City Commission enjoy under law when casting votes in their official
29 capacities; and
30
31 WHEREAS, s. 790.33 conflicts with Article 4, Section 7 of the Florida Constitution, by
32 allowing the Governor to remove a municipal official who has not been indicted for any crime,
33 and violates due process; and
34
35 WHEREAS, the City Commission believes it is in the best interest of the residents of the
36 City to file a lawsuit seeking a declaration that the Onerous Preemption Penalties are invalid.
37
38 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
39 COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
40
41 Section 1: The foregoing recitals contained in the preamble to this Resolution are
42 incorporated by reference herein.
43
44 Section 2: The City Attorney is hereby authorized and instructed to join with the City of
45 Weston in its lawsuit seeking declaratory and other appropriate relief to challenge the Onerous
Page 2 of 3
Add-on item a)
Sponsored by: Mayor Stoddard
3/6/18 City Commission Meeting
1 Preemption Penalties contained in Section 790.33, Florida Statutes, based upon any appropriate
2 legal theories, including those set forth above.
3
4 Section 3: The City Commission invites and urges other local governments and elected
5 officials to join the City as plaintiffs in the lawsuit and to coordinate their efforts with the City of
6 Weston.
7
8 Section 4: The City Clerk IS directed to distribute this Resolution to all local
9 governments in Miami-Dade County.
10
11 Section 5: The appropriate City officials are authorized to execute all necessary
12 documents and to take any necessary action to effectuate the intent of this Resolution.
13
14 Section 6: Severability. If any section clause, sentence, or phrase of this resolution is for
15 any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, the holding shall
16 not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution.
17
18 Section 7: Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon
19 adoption.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of _____ , 2018.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
CITY CLERK MAYOR
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM, COMMISSION VOTE:
LANGUAGE, LEGALITY AND EXECUTION Mayor Stoddard:
EXECUTION THEREOF Vice Mayor Harris:
Commissioner Welsh:
Commissioner Liebman:
Commissioner Gil:
CITY ATTORNEY
Page 3 of3
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
CITY OF WESTON, FLORI DA
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-30
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WESTON,
FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO FILE A
LAWSUIT SEEKING A DECLARATION THAT THE PROVISIONS PUNISHING
ELECTED OFFICIALS SET FORTH IN SECTION 790.33, FLORIDA STATUTES, FOR
VIOLATING THE PREEMPTION RELATED TO THE REGULATION OF FIREARMS
AND AMMUNITION ARE INVALID, AND INVITING OTHER LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS TO JOIN THE LAWSUIT.
13 WHEREAS, First, over the past several years there have been an unprecedented number of
14 mass shootings in American communities including, most recently, at Marjory Stoneman Douglas
15 High School in Parkland, Florida; and
16
17 WHEREAS, Second, National and State leaders continue to fail to act to implement sensible
18 gun law reforms that are supported by a majority of the nation; and
19
20 WHEREAS, Third, the residents of Weston have repeatedly petitioned that the City
21 Commission take action regarding gun violence, including requests that the City ban, restrict or take
22 other steps that would reduce the threat from firearms in City facilities and parks; and
23
24 WHEREAS, Fifth, on January 22, 2013, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2013-
25 03, urging the Florida Legislature to repeal certain sections of Florida Statutes that prevent local
26 governments from exercising their Home Rule Authority to regulate and/or prohibit firearms in public
27 parks and other local government-owned facilities and property; and
28
29 WHEREAS, Sixth, on April 7, 2014, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2014-34,
30 supporting House 8ill305 and Senate Bill 492, which would have amended Florida Statutes to permit
31 a local government to exercise its Home Rule Authority to regulate firearms and ammunition upon
32 local government-owned property; and
33
34 WHEREAS, Seventh, the City's requests to the State Legislature to enact legislation relating to
35 firearms in City facilities and parks, or to allow the City to do so, have been unsuccessful; and
36
37 WHEREAS, Eighth, in Section 790.33, Florida Statutes, the State of Florida (a) declared that it
38 is occupying the whole field of regulation of firearms and ammunition, to the exclusion of all existing
39 and future county or city ordinances, regulations or rules, (b) purports to prohibit the enactment of
40 any future ordinances or regulations "relating to firearms," and (c) also purports to create potential
41 liability for damages for actions other than ordinances and regulations, including any "measure,
42 directive, rule, enactment, order, or policy promulgated or caused to be enforced"; and
43
44 WHEREAS, Ninth, the purported preemption, by using the terms "relating to firearms" and
45 "any measure, directive, rule, enactment, order or policy promulgated," is extremely broad and
46 vague, and could apply to a panoply of measures that the City would like to consider enacting,
#69019 v1 Resolution No. 2018-30 Page 1 of 4
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WESTON, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO FILE A LAWSUIT SEEKING A DECLARATION THAT THE PROVISIONS
PUNISHING ELECTED OFFICIALS SET FORTH IN SECTION 790.33, FLORIDA STATUTES, FOR VIOLATING
THE PREEMPTION RELATED TO THE REGULATION OF FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION ARE INVALID,
AND INVITING OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO JOIN THE LAWSUIT.
including the restricting of guns in City facilities and parks, the placing of signs relating to guns in
2 City facilities and parks, the regulation of gun accessories (such as holsters or bump stocks) or the
3 creating of "gun free zones" or "gun safe zones"; and
4
5 WHEREAS, Tenth, the potential violation of the broad and vague preemption of firearm
6 regulation in Section 790.33, Florida Statutes, carries the risk of onerous and punitive consequences,
7 including but not limited to damages up to $100,000 and fines up to $5,000 (for which the official
8 may be personally liable), removal from office by the Governor without due process of law, and a
9 prohibition of the use of public funds to payor reimburse the official for fines, damages or defense
10 costs (collectively, the "Onerous Preemption Penalties"); and
11
12 WHEREAS, Eleventh, as a result of the Onerous Preemption Penalties, the City Commission
13 and its members fear taking any steps that cou Id even remotely be viewed as a violation of the
14 preemption, creating a chilling effect upon City action and preventing the City Commission from
15 responding to the petitions and requests of the City's residents to do someth ing to protect against the
16 dangers of firearms; and
17
18 WHEREAS, Twelfth, the City Commission and its members desire to consider various
19 reasonable measures related to firearms, including the restriction of guns in City facilities and parks,
20 the placing of signs related to guns in City facilities and parks, the regulation of gun accessories (such
21 as holsters or bump stocks), the creation of "gun free zones" or "gun safe zones/' or other measures
22 related to guns, but have refrained from doing so because they could possibly be viewed as falling
23 under the preemption and be subjected to the Onerous Preemption Penalties; and
24
25 WHEREAS, Thirteenth, the Onerous Preemption Penalties strike at the core of the American
26 system of democratic representation: they suppress, in an insidious, Orwellian fashion, the voice of
27 the local electorate through intimidation of local elected officials; and
28
29 WHEREAS, Fourteenth, the Onerous Preemption Penalties infringe on the free speech rights
30 of the City Commission and its members, and interfere with their ability to perform their official
31 duties; and
32
33 WHEREAS, Fifteenth, the Onerous Preemption Penalties infringe upon the legislative
34 immunity the members of the City Commission enjoy under law when casting votes in their official
35 capacities; and
36
37 WHEREAS, Sixteenth, the portion of the Onerous Preemption Penalties related to the removal
38 from office by the Governor conflicts with Article 4, Section 7 of the Florida Constitution, byallowing
39 the Governor to remove a municipal official who has not been indicted for any crime, and violates
40 due process; and
41
#69019 v1 Resolution No. 2018-30 Page 2 of 4
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WESTON, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO FILE A LAWSUIT SEEKING A DECLARATION THAT THE PROVISIONS
PUNISHING ELECTED OFFICIALS SET FORTH IN SECTION 790.33, FLORIDA STATUTES, FOR VIOLATING
THE PREEMPTION RELATED TO THE REGULATION OF FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION ARE INVALID,
AND INVITING OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO JOIN THE LAWSUIT.
WHEREAS, Seventeenth, the City Commission believes it is in the best interest of the residents
2 of the City to file a lawsuit seeking a declaration that the Onerous Preemption Penalties are invalid
3 and urging other local governments to join the lawsuit as plaintiffs with the City.
4
5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Weston, Florida:
6
7 Section 1: The foregoing recitals contained in the preamble to this Resolution are incorporated by
8 reference herein.
9
10 Section 2: The City Commission hereby authorizes and directs the City Attorney to file a lawsuit
II naming the City and those any individual Members of the Commission (in their official capacity) who
12 choose to participate, as plaintiffs, seeking declaratory and other appropriate relief to challenge the
13 Onerous Preemption Penalties contained in Section 790.33, Florida Statutes, based upon any
14 appropriate legal theories, including those set forth above.
15
16 Section 3: The City Commission invites and urges other local governments and elected officials to
17 join the City as plaintiffs in the lawsuit and to coordinate their efforts with the City.
18
19 Section 4: The City Clerk is directed to distribute this Resolution to all local governments in Broward
20 County.
21
22 Section 5: The appropriate City officials are authorized to execute all necessary documents and to
23 take any necessary action to effectuate the intent of this Resolution.
24
25 Section 6: This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
26
27
!!69019v1 Resolution No. 2018-30 Page 3 of 4
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WESTON, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO FILE A LAWSUIT SEEKING A DECLARATION TH.-\T THE PROVISIONS
PUNISHING ELECTED OFFICIALS SET FORTH IN SECTION 790.33, FLORIDA STATUTES, FOR VIOLATING
THE PREEMPTION RELATED TO THE REGULATION OF FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION ARE INVALID,
AND INVITING OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO JOIN THE LAWSUIT.
I ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Weston, Florida, this
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 ATTEST:
10 :~ ;;t(~~-y~
13~ Patricia A. Bates, City Clerk
14
15 Approved as to form and legality
16 for the use of .. anJr reliance by the
17 City of ~.s(on n Iy, (~
18 /' .1 ~ /
19 { .
20 ----...
21 Jamie A. C I , City Attorney
22
#69019 \'1 Resolution No. 2018·30
Daniel J.
Roll Call:
Commissioner Jaffe
Commissioner Feuer
Commissioner Kallman
Commissioner Brown
Mayor Stermer
yes
~ ~
Pagp 4 of 4
Qltitutipiac ,i 1:'()11
UNIVERSITY
FOR RELEASE: FEBRUARY 28, 2018
Peter A. Brown, Assistant Director
(203) 535-6203
Rubenstein
Pat Smith (212) 843-8026
FLORIDA VOTERS OPPOSE TEACHERS WITH GUNS,
QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY POLL FINDS;
SUPPORT FOR 'ASSAULT WEAPON' BAN ALMOST 2-1
Florida voters oppose 56 -40 percent allowing teachers and school officials to carry guns on
school grounds, according to a Quinnipiac University Poll released today. Voters with children
under 18 years old in public schools oppose arming school personnel 53 -43 percent.
But 51 percent of voters say "increased security at school entrances" would do more to
reduce gun violence in schools, compared to 32 percent who say stricter gun laws would do more
and 12 percent who say armed teachers would do more to keep schools safe, the independent
Quinnipiac (KWfN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll finds.
Florida voters support 62 -33 percent a nationwide ban on the sale of "assault weapons."
In a separate question with different wording, voters support 53 -42 percent a nationwide ban on
the sale of all "semi-automatic rifles."
Voters support 65 -29 percent "stricter gun laws," with strong support for other gun
control measures:
• 96 -3 percent for requiring background checks for all gun buyers;
• 62 -34 percent for a nationwide ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines that hold
more than 1 0 rounds;
• 87 -1 0 percent for a mandatory waiting period on all gun purchases;
• 78 -20 percent for requiring that all gun buyers be at least 21 years old;
• 89 -8 percent for allowing police or family members to petition a judge to remove guns
from a person who may be at risk of violent behavior;
• 92 -6 percent for banning gun ownership by anyone who has had a restraining order for
stalking, domestic abuse or other reasons.
"The notion that we are bitterly divided on political matters -the case for past decades -
has found an exception to that rule. Florida voters -be they young or old, white or black, man or
woman -have a common enemy," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac
University Poll.
-IDore-
2/5 \1ount Carmel Avenue, Harnden. CI O()')j8·j908 T 203·')81·S201 f 203·')1-\2·1-\790 \\\\'\V.qll.cdt!
Quinnipiac University Poll/February 28, 2018 -page 2
"Floridians are strongly united that more needs to be done to reign in guns, especially the
type of gun used this month to massacre 17 people in Parkland," Brown added.
"Depending on how questions are asked, large majorities support efforts to restrict gun
purchases; to require background checks for buyers and to ban certain types of guns.
"These numbers show remarkable agreement across the electorate, the kind not seen very
often these days."
It is "too easy" to buy a gun in Florida today, 63 percent of voters say, while 28 percent
say it is "about right" and 1 percent say it is "too difficult."
Florida voters oppose 56 -36 percent allowing local governments to adopt gun laws that
are stricter than state law.
If more people carried guns, Florida would be "less safe," 56 percent of voters say, while
34 percent say the state would be "safer."
Florida's state government must do more to reduce gun violence, 75 percent of voters
say, while 18 percent say government is doing enough.
Voters give Gov. Rick Scott a split 42 -45 percent approval rating for his handling of the
issue of gun violence.
Voters disapprove 54 -40 percent of President Donald Trump's handling of gun violence
and disapprove 50 -39 percent of the president's response to the Parkland school massacre.
Voters disapprove 52 -31 percent of Sen. Marco Rubio's handling of gun violence and
give Sen. Bill Nelson a divided score as 36 percent approve and 37 percent disapprove.
Voting Rights for Former Felons
Florida voters support 67 -27 percent restoring voting rights to convicted felons, other
than those convicted of murder or sexual offenses, who have completed their sentences.
Every listed party, gender, education, age and racial group supports this idea, with
support ranging from 50 -42 percent among Republicans to 82 -15 percent among Democrats.
From February 23 -26, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,156 Florida voters with a
margin of error of +/-3.6 percentage points, including the design effect. Live interviewers call
landlines and cell phones.
The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts
nationwide public opinion surveys, and statewide polls in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey,
Connecticut, Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Iowa and Colorado as a public service and for research.
Visit Iloll.gu.edu or www.facebook.com/guinnipiacpoll
Call (203) 582-5201, or follow us on Twitter @QuinnipiacPoll.
2
17. Do yOJ scpporl:. or oppose resto~-=-::-:g vot::"ng ~ig~-:=.s :~o ind::" viduals who r.ave cOTrul.i t Led a
felony otjer than ~~rder or seXLa~ o~fe~se and comp~eted their sentences?
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
TOl_
67%
27
6
AGE IN
18-34
79%
19
2
Gun
EsEld
63%
31
7
Rep Oem Ind
50% 82% 68%
42 IS 25
8 3 6
YRS ... ...........
35-49 50-64 65+
62% 66% 65%
32 30 25
6 4 9
DENSITY ............
City S~burb Rural
63% 72% 64%
31 23 28
6 5 8
Wi.JITE ......
COLLEGE DEG
Men WorT'. Yes No
63% 70% 66% 63%
32 23 25 31
5 7 9 5
WHITE ....
Jllien Worn Wht Blk
59% 69% 6"!lc vO 82%
35 23 28 14
6 8 7 4
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes School
62% 63%
31 32
6 5
19. Do you support or oppose stricter gun laws in the United States?
WHITE ..... .
COLLEGE DEG
Tot Rep Cern Ind Men Worn Yes No
Support 6"!lc vO 43% 87% 68% 53% 7 6% 66% 57%
Oppose 29 to .J 10 26 41 18 30 34
DK/NA 6 8 2 6 6 6 4 8
AGE IN YRS .............. WHITE .....
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+ Me'l Worn Wht Blk
Support 72% 62% 62% 69% 48% 73% 61% 77%
Oppose 23 34 31 24 46 22 32 1 a .'-J
DK/NA 5 4 7 7 7 6 6 5
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Gun DENSITY ............ InPublic
HsHld City Suburb Rural Yes School
Support 49% 68% 68% 50% 64 % 63%
Oppose ';2 27 26 41 33 34
DK/NA 9 4 6 9 3 3
Hsp
62%
35
3
Hsp
73%
23
5
3
20. ~o you suppor~ or oppose reou~r~ng bac~grou~d chec~s for all gun buyers?
Wr-L~TE ..... .
COLLEGE 1)t:G
Tot Rep JeD Ir:d Jl.'en WOITL Yes No
Support 96% 94% 97% 97% 95% 97% 96% 98%
Oppose 3 5 3 2 4 2 3 2
DK/NA 1 1 1 2
AGE IN YRS. WHITE.
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+ Men Worn Wht Blk
Support 99% 94% 95% 97% 95% 98% 97% 91%
Oppose I 5 5 2 4 1 2 9
DK/NA 1 ~ 1 1 1
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
GU:J DE]\;SITY. InPublic
EsHld City Subilrb Rural Yes School
Support 95% 96% 97% 94% 96% 96%
Oppose 4 3 3 5 3 3
DK/NA 1 1 1 1. 1 I
21. Do you support or oppose a :JaL~onwide ban on the sale of assault weapons?
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Tot
62%
33
5
AGE IN
18-34
47%
46
7
Gun
HsHld
43%
52
5
Rep DeJ.\ :l:nd
40% 86% 62%
53 11 32
7 3 5
YRS ... . . ..... . . . .
35-49 50-64 65+
5"<9-~O 6~9-~o 76%
43 29 20
4 7 4
DENSITY.
City Subcrb Rural
65% 64% 48%
29 32 47
6 3 5
Men WOJ.\
47% 75%
50 18
3 7
WHITE .....
Men WOJ11.
44% 75%
53 19
3 6
HAVE KIDS <18
WellTE. .....
COLLEGE DEG
Yes No
64% 58%
32 37
4 4
Wht Slk
61% 68%
35 25
4 7
YRS
InPublic
Yes School
50% L09-• J 0
46 46
4 5
Hsp
98%
2
Hsp
64%
32
4
4
22. Do yo~ supporc or oppose a ~a~~o~wide ban on the sale of all sern~-automatic rifles?
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Suppor~
Opoose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Tot
53%
42
:,
AGE II\:
18-34
50%
48
2
Gun
HsHld
32%
64
4
Rep Dem :::nd
27% 78% 55%
66 19 39
7 3 6
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
Li 1 g, • ~ 0 58% 62%
55 38 31
4 4 7
DENS:::TY.
City Suburb Rural
57% 56% 34%
38 38 60
5 5 6
WHITE ..... .
COLLEGE DEG
Men Worn Yes No
36% 68% 53% 48%
59 26 40 48
5 6 7 5
WHITE.
Men Worn Wht Blk Hsp
31% 67% 5C% 66% 58%
65 27 44 33 38
4 7 6 2 4
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes School
44% 42%
52 52
4 5
23. Do you support or oppose a nationwide ban on the sale of high-capacity ahlmunition
magazines that hold more than 10 bullets?
WHITE ......
COLLEGE O'C'r' I L.JI..::;;
Tot Rep Dem Ind Men Worn Yes No
Support 62% 39% 85% 65% 48% 75% 64 % 58%
Oppose 34 56 14 31 50 20 30 39
DK/NA 4 6 4 3 5 6 3
AGE IN YRS .............. WHILE ...
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+ Men Worn Wht Blk Hsp
Support 57% 54% 66% 72% 47% 73% 61% 74% 65%
Oppose 42 43 31 24 51 21 34 26 33
D'</NA 1 3 3 4 2 7 5 1 2
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Gun DENSITY ..... . . ..... InPublic
HsHld City SubGrb Rural Yes School
Support 46% 65% 62% 55% 55% 53%
Oppose 50 32 34 40 42 43
DK/NA L 3 t; 5 3 3
5
24. Do you suppor~ or oppose ~rnpos~~g a ~a~da~ory wai~ing period on ali gu~ purchases, so
t:.hat everyone who Durchases a gur. m'"s,_ wa:' t a cert:.alr: r:UffiDe.::-of days before taking the
gU:l home?
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Tot
87%
10
3
AGE IN
i8-34
85%
14
1
GG.:1
HsI-lid
83%
14
2
Rep uem Inc
82% 96% 88%
14 3 10
4 1 2
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
88% 87% 90%
10 11 6
2 2 -:;
DENS:=TY.
City Suburb Rural
90% 87% 82%
8 11 13
2 2 5
WHITE.
COLLEGE DEG
Men Worn Yes No
83% 91% 86% 87%
is 6 9 l.~
2 3 5 2
WhITE . . .
Men Wom Wht Elk Hsp
81% 91% 87% 93% 90%
17 5 10 7 9
2 4 3
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
i:nPub1ic
Yes School
85% 85%
14 i4
1 1
25. Do you support or oppose impos:'~g a ~andatory waiting per:'od on purchases of assault
weapons, so that everyone who p~rchases an assauit:. weapon must wait:. a ce.::-tain number of
days before taking it home?
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Suppo.::-t
Oppose
DK/NA
To~
85%
J.....:..
4
AGE IN
18-34
85%
13
2
Gun
HsHld
83%
:;'4
3
Rep Jerr.
82% 89%
13 7
5 4
YRS.
35-49 50-64
86% 86%
12 9
2 5
DENSITY.
City Suou.::-b
88% 85%
9 10
3 6
Iod
87%
10
2
65+
85%
9
6
Rural
81%
17
2
WHITE.
COLLEGE DEG
Men \rilom Yes No
8,9-~ 0 89% 85% 84%
15 6 10 11
4 5 5 5
WHITE.
Men Worn Wht Blk lisp
79% 89% 85% 89% 89%
17 5 10 10 10
4 6 5 1 -
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes School
85% 83%
13 :: 5
2 2
6
26. Do you supDor~ or oppose requ~r~~g ~nd~viduals ~o be 21 years of age or older In
order to purchase a gu~?
WE~~~ ..... .
COLLSGE DEG
ToL. Rep DerTl Ind Men Worn Yes No
Support 78% 68% 93% 77% 67 % 88% 76% 74%
Oppose 20 29 7 22 31 ~o 20 24
DK/NA 2 3 1 2 2 3 2
AGE :::N YRS. WHITE.
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+ Men Worn Wht Blk Hsp
Support 77% 7=-% 82% 82% 63% 85% 75% 88% 81%
Oppose 23 27 17 : 5 35 12 22 12 18
DK/NA 1 2 1 3 2 3 2
HAV!': KIDS <18 YRS
Gun DENSITY. InPublic
HsHld City SLCburb RLi.ra} Yes School
Support 69% 78% 80% 74% 78% 78%
Oppose 30 20 19 23 21 21
DK/NA 2 2 2 3 1 1
27. Do you support or oppose al~owing the police or family members to petition a judge to
remove gu~s fro2 a person that ~ay be at r~sk for violent behav~or?
WHITE ..... .
COLLEGE DEG
Tot Rep Oem Ind Men Worn Yes No
Support 89% 86% 93% 91% 84% 94% 88% 92%
Oppose 8 8 5 7 12 4 7 5
DK/NA 3 5 :1 2 4 2 5 3
AGE: IN YRS. WHITE.
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+ Men Worn Wht Blk Hsp
Support 90% 87% 87% 93% 87% 92% 90% 88% 91%
Oppose 8 10 9 4 9 4 6 11 7
DK/NA 2 3 4 3 4 3 4 1 2
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Gun DENSITY. InPublic
l-!sH.~d City Suburb Rura: Yes School
SJPport 86% 91% 91% 83% 86% 87%
Oppose J.J. 6 6 .:0 .., r'I, 10 ". v
DK/NA 3 4 3 1 4 4
7
28. Do you support or oppos~ banni~g t~e possessio~ or purctase o~ a gun if an individuai
has had a restraining order fi~ed against t~em for stalking or domestic, sexual, or
repeat violence?
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Tot
92%
6
2
AGE IN
18-34
92%
5
3
Gun
HsHld
91%
8
J.
Rep Oem :ind
91% 96% 92%
7 3 7
2 1 1
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
85% 94% 97%
12 4 2
3 2 1
DENSITY.
Cit:y Suburb Rural
90% 95% 93%
7 4 6
2 ~ J.
W;-{I'TE.
COLLEGE DES
Mer: WOIT. Yes No
89% 95% 94% 94%
8 4 5 4
3 1 2 1
.L
WHITE.
Men Worn Wht Blk Hsp
91% 97% 94% 86% 93%
7 2 4 12 5
3 1 2 2 2
HAVE KIDS <:i8 YRS
InPJblic
Yes School
86% 86%
10 10
.I; 4
29. Do you think t~at local governments s~ould be allowed to enact: stricter gun laws to
meet the needs of their comIC1unities, or should local governments be required to follow
state gun laws?
WHITE ......
COLLEGE DEG
'Yot Reo Oem Ind Men Worn Yes No
Allow stricter laws 36% 20% 52% 38% 29% 43% 40% 3 iSlc _ a
Follow state laws 56 71 43 55 64 49 54 62
DK/NA 8 9 5 7 7 8 6 7
AGE IN YRS ... . . . ... . .. . . WHITE ...
J.8-34 35-49 50-64 65-'-Men Worn Wht Blk Esp
Allow stricter laws 35% 35% 38% 37% 26% 43% 36% 43% 38%
Follow state laws 59 60 56 52 67 51 58 57 50
DK/NA 5 5 6 11 7 6 7 1 12
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Gun DENSITY ............ InPublic
HsEld City SubClrb Rural Yes School
Allow stricter laws 26% 36% 40% 29% 34% 31%
Follow state laws 69 53 55 67 57 60
DK/NA 6 11 5 Ii 8 9
8
30. Do you think it is too easy to buy a gun in Flo~ida today, too difficulL to buy a gun
in Florida today, o~ about right?
Too easy
Too difficult
About right
DK/NA
Too easy
Too difficult
About right
DK/NA
Too easy
Too difficult
About right
DK/NA
Tot
63%
1
28
8
AGE: IN
18-34
68%
2
25
4
Gun
HsHld
48%
46
5
Rep Oem Ind
38% 89% 64%
2 1 2
50 6 26
11 ,-; 9
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
59% 64% 65%
1 2
37 28 20
3 6 :.4
DSNSITY ........... .
City
66%
1
24
9
Suburb Rural
64% 53%
2 1
27 41
7 6
W~ITE ..... .
COLLEGE DEG
Men Worn Yes No
49% 75% 61% 55%
2 1 2
43 15 29 37
6 9 8 8
WHITE.
Men
42%
1
50
7
EAVE
Yes
60%
1
34
5
Worn
71%
1
19
9
Wht
58%
1
33
8
'<IDS <18 YRS
InPub1ic
School
58%
1
35
5
Blk
76%
1
14
9
Hsp
74%
1
19
5
31. !f rno~e people ca~~ied guns, do you think that Florida would be safer or less safe?
WEITE ......
COLLEGE DEG
Tot Re~ Oem Ind Men Worn Yes No
Safer 34% 64% 6% 30% 48% 21% 36% 45%
Less safe 56 21 91 58 43 67 52 46
OK/NA 10 15 3 13 8 12 12 9
AGE IN YRS .............. WHITE .....
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+ Men Worn Wht Blk Hsp
Safer 35% 39% 35% 26% 57% 27% 40% 10% 25%
Less safe 59 50 56 63 35 61 49 85 63
DK/NA 6 10 8 12 8 13 11 5 12
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Gun DENSITY ............ InPublic
HsHJ.d City Suburb Rural Yes School
Safe~ 5 1i % 32% 33% 43% 37% 38%
Less safe 34 59 56 48 53 53
DK/NA 12 10 11 9 9 9
9
32. Do yoc suppor~ OT oppose allowing teac~ers and school o~ficials to carry guns on
SChOO.:t groL:.~ds?
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Support
Oppose
DK/NA
Tot
40%
56
4
AGE IN
18-34
32%
66
2
Gun
HsHld
57%
38
4
Rep Oem Ina
72% :1% 37%
21 86 60
7 3 3
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65~
46% 42% 35%
51 55 59
3 4 6
DENSITY.
City SLlb'Jrb Hural
38% 38% 50%
58 57 45
3 5 6
WHITt: ..... .
COLLEGE DEG
Men Worn Yes No
48% 33% 45% 51%
48 63 51 45
4 5 4 4
WHIlE.
Men Worn Wht Blk Hsp
59% 39% 48% :9% 27%
37 56 48 78 68
3 5 4 3 5
J-iAVE KIDS <18 YRS
rnPublic
Yes School
43% 43%
52 53
5 4
33. Which of these do you think would do more to reduce gun violence in schools, havi~g
stricter gun laws, ar~ed teac~ers in schools, or increased security a~ school entrances?
Tot
Stricter gur: laws 32%
Armed teachers 12
I!1creased security 5l
DK/NA 5
AGE IN
18-34
Stricter gc;n laws
Armed teachers
Increased security
DK/NA
33%
11
54
1
Gun
Hsl-lld
Stricter gun laws 17%
Armed teachers 19
Increased security 59
DK/NA 5
C<.ep Oem Inc
8% 59% 29%
24 12
64 38 53
4 3 7
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
26% 34% 35%
9 16 12
60 45 47
5 5 6
DENSI1Y ........... .
City Suburb Rural
30% 36% 26%
12 J2 J6
52 to _ J 52
5 4 6
WHrlE.
COLLEGE DEG
iV:en Worn Yes No
25% 38% 34% 26%
18 8 16 16
54 48 45 52
4 6 5 6
WHITE.
Men Worn Wht 3lk Esp
22% 37% 30% 35% 34%
23 11 16 4 8
52 45 48 55 56
3 7 5 6 3
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes School
25% 23%
l3 14
58 58
4 4
10
34. ~o you approve or disapprove of President TrJ~p's response to che rece~t schooi
shooting in Florioa?
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Tot
39%
50
~O
ArT;' LJ~ IN
18-34
24%
56
20
Gun
Hs'-lld
54%
34
12
Rep Oem Ind
75% 9% 34%
14 85 53
""1 1 ~~ 6 ~2
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
42% 41% 4:%
5 A
lJ 52 49
8 7 10
DENSITY.
Cic:.y Suburb Rurai
36% 40% 49%
53 52 liO
11 9
WHITE ..... .
COLLEGE ::JSG
Men Worn Yes No
45% 34% 44% Li OQ-• J 0
44 57 49 38
12 9 8 13
WHITE.
Men Wom Wht Blk Hsp
55% 39% 46% 13% 34%
33 51 43 77 55
12 9 10 11 11
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
In:c>ublic
Yes School
38% 35%
50 51
12 14
35. Do you ~hink Congress is doing enough to reduce gun violence or do you think Congress
needs ~o do more to reduce gun violence?
WHIlE.
COLLEGE DEG
Tot Rep De~ Ind Men Worn Yes No
Qoing enoCigh 16% 28% 2% 16% 22% 10% 16% 20%
00 more 79 63 98 78 71 86 78 70
O'<:/NA 6 10 6 7 4 6 10
AGE IN YKS. WHITE. ..
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+ Men Worn Wht Blk Hsp
Doing enough 17% 17% 17% lO% 26% 12% 18% 3% 13%
Do more 81 76 78 84 64 82 74 97 84
DK/NA 1 7 5 6 11 6 8 3
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Gun DENSITY. InPublic
'-lsHld City Suburb Rural Yes School
Doing enough 25% 1 ..., 0
..L.i-o 16% 25% 18% 19%
~o more 67 83 80 65 78 77
DK/NA 8 5 I; JO 4 I;
11
36. Do you ~hink f~oritia's s~ate governmen~ is tio~~g enough ~o retiuce gun vio~ence or tio
you think florida's state governmen~ neeas to tio more ~o reduce gun vio!ence?
Doing enm.:gh
Do more
DK/NA
Doing enm.;gh
Do more
DK/NA
Doing enough
Do more
DK/NA
ToL.
18%
75
6
AGE IN
18-34
14%
8J
5
G·un
Esi-Lld
28%
64
8
Rep Oem
32% 3%
58 96
10
YRS.
35-Lj9 50-64
2~% 21%
7t, 74
5 5
DENSITY.
Cj. ty Suburb
15% 17%
79 77
6 6
:Lnd
18%
75
7
65+
14%
78
8
RG.ra~
29%
64
8
Men Wom
26% 11%
67 83
6 6
Wl-L::TE ..... .
COLLEG2 DEG
Yes No
18%
75
7
24%
68
8
WHIlE .....
]V;en
3l%
62
6
Worn
13%
80
8
Wht
21%
72
7
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Yes
22%
76
3
InPublic
School
21%
76
3
Blk
3%
95
1
Hsp
80
3
37. Do you think that the NRA, or Na~ional Rifle Association, supports policies that are
good for ~!orida or supoorts policies that are bad for ~lorida?
Good
baG
DK/NA
Good
Bad
DK/NA
Good
3aG
DK/NA
Tot
35%
50
16
AGE IN
18-34
26%
58
16
Gun
HsHld
55%
31
H
Rep De'E Inc
64% 9% 30%
17 81 53
19 10 17
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
37% 39% 30%
40 52 55
23 9 15
DENSITY.
City Suburb RLl:cal
30% 33% 52%
51 57 31
20 10 17
Men
48%
LA .U
12
WHITE.
Men
55%
35
10
WOIT!
23%
58
19
Wom
29%
56
15
WHI~E ..... .
COLLEGE DEG
Yes
37%
51
12
Wht
1119-• ~ 0
46
13
No
45%
42
14
Blk
18%
66
16
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Yes
36%
45
20
InPublic
School
36%
42
22
Hsp
24%
52
24
12
38. (~~tro 038-42: For each of the ~ol~ow~~g, please tell me II you approve or disapprove
of their handling of t~e issue of gun violence.)
Do you approve or disapprove of -?resident Trump's ~andling of the issue of gun
viole~ce?
Approve
Djsapprove
D."C/NA
Approve
Di.sapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Disapprove
D."C/NA
iot
48%
54
5
AGE IN
18-34
28%
61
11
Gun
HsHld
56%
38
6
Rep Ce:Tl ~:1d
75% 10% 35%
18 88 59
8 2 7
Y'<.S.
35-49 50-64 65+
43% 43% 39%
51 55 56
5 3 5
D1::1\SIT'(.
City Suburb Rural
35% 42% 48%
58 55 44
6 3 8
WHITS.
COI,::"SGE DEC;
Men Worn Yes No
48% 33% '<;4% 50%
46 61 53 42
5 6 3 8
WHITS.
Me:1 Worn Wht Blk Hsp
58% 39% 47% 17% 35%
36 56 47 79 61
6 5 6 4 4
EAVE KI:JS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes School
42% 42%
53 53
5 5
39. Do you approve or disapprove of -Gover:1or Scott's handling of the issue of gun
vioience?
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Di.sapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Disapprove
DK/l'iA
Tot
42%
45
13
AGE IN
18-34
32%
46
22
Gun
HsHld
57%
32
12
ReD Den: Ind
68% 21% 38%
21 71 '<;3
11 8 10 .l.~ ~::;
YRS.
35-49 5C-64 65+
40% 45% 45%
44 49 43
16 6 13
DENSITY.
City SUDGrb RU1:'al
42% 39% 49%
44 OJ' 0V 34
14 11 16
WHITE ..... .
COLL:t::GE DEG
Men Worn Yes No
48% 37% [.19-_ ~ 0 51%
41i 46 48 33
9 17 11 16
WHITE.
Men Worn Wht Bll< Hsp
54% 39% 46% 32% 37%
37 44 41 61 47
9 17 13 7 16
EAVE KIDS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes Schoo~
4 I 9-~ 0 42%
45 0
14 14
13
40. Do you approve or disapprove of -the sca~e legis~a~~re's handling of the issue of
gun vlolence?
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Tot
22%
59
19
AGE IN
18-34
23%
53
24
Gun
HsHld
30%
46
24
I~ep DeIT. Ina
35% 9% 2~%
38 83 59
27 8 20
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
27% 24% 15%
56 61 64
:16 ~5 21
DENSITY.
City Suburb RLl~al
21% 21% 30%
60 65 43
~L 9 15 27
WHITE ..... .
COLLEGE DEG
Men Worn Yes No
38% 15% 21% 2"<90 ~ 0
53 64 61 54
17 21 :1.8 23
WHITE.
Men Worn Wht Blk Esp
31% 15% 22% 22% 22%
52 62 57 72 58
17 23 20 6 19
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes School
26% 26%
55 54
19 20
41. Do you approve or disapprove of -Senator Rubio's handling of the issue of gun
violence?
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Jisapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Tot:
31%
52
17
AGE IT\:
18-34
25%
55
20
G-CD
HsHld
39%
41
19
Rep Dern :::nd
52% 1,90 ~O 30%
24 81 50
24 6 19
YRS ..............
35-49 50-64 65+
36% 34% 28%
48 55 53
16 11 19
DENSITY.
City Suburb Ru~al
29% 33% 34%
55 53 42
16 14 24
WHITE ..... .
COLLEGE DEG
Men Worn Yes No
38% 26% 35% 33%
48 56 52 42
14 19 14 24
WHITr:: ....
!Vien Worn Wht Blk Esp
44% 26% 34% 29% 25%
40 53 47 63 62
16 22 19 8 13
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes School
35% 35%
49 50
16 15
14
42. Do you approve or disapprove of -Senator Ke:son's handling of t~e issue of gun
violer;ce?
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
Approve
Disapprove
DK/NA
lot
36%
37
28
AGE IN
18-34
27%
32
~ ~ .J.
Gun
HsHld
3' 0 ~i5
41
28
Rep Oem Ind
~; 7 % 57% 33%
c Cl :J~ 24 31
29 ::'8 36
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65-'-
34% 39% 40%
33 42 37
33 19 23
DENSITY.
City S-ubClrb R'-~' U-,--G-L
35% 36% 35%
36 38 36
29 26 29
W'1EE ..... .
COLLEGE DEC
Men WOIT'. Yes No
33% 38% 38% 32%
43 30 36 38
24 31 25 30
WiETS . . .
Men Worn Wht Blk Hsp
32% 38% 35% ;---: 0 ,:)1.""6 29%
45 31 37 33 38
24 31 28 15 33
EAVE KIDS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes Sd:ool
35% 31%
34 36
31 33
43. If you agreed with a candidace for United Scaces Senator on other iss-ues, but no~ on
t~e issue of g~n laws, could you still vote for thac candidate, or would you definitely
noc VOLe for that candidate?
Yes/StiLL vote
No/Not vote
DK/NA
Yes/Still vote
No/Not vote
DK/NA
Yes/Sti 11 vote
No/Not vote
DK/NA
Tot
47%
42
4 ,
.;..J.
AGE IN
18-34
50%
41
9
HsHld
53%
37
10
Rep Oern Ind
58% 33% 51%
29 59 38
13 8 1 -
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
50% 47% 42%
39 44 43
11 9 14
DENSITY.
City Suburb Rural
46% 51% H%
42 40 43
12 9 = 1
WHITE.
COLLEGE DEG
Men Worn Yes No
52% 43% 45% 50%
38 45 42 40
10 13 13 11
WHITE.
Men WaIT'. Wht Blk Hsp
c..~9-~~O 42% 47% 50% 50%
38 44 41 45 36
9 14 12 6 13
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Ini:lubl:.c
Yes School
46% L; 6%
41 42
13 13
15
44. If you agreed with a candida~e [or gover~or o~ other iss~es, but not on the iss~e of
gun laws, coulc you s~ill vote for t~a~ candicate, or would you definitely not vote for
that candidate?
Yes/Still vote
Ko/Not vote
DK/NA
Yes/Still vote
No/Not vote
DK/NA
Yes/Still vote
No/Not vote
DK/NA
Tot Rep 'Jem Ind
46% 58% 32% 50%
44 31 60 40
10 11 8 10
AGE 1K YRS.
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
49% 50% I!. OSl-• J 0 4 C%
43 40 45 48
9 10 6 12
Gun DENS=~Y ........... .
HsHld City Sub~rb Rural
51%
39
10
45%
45
10
49%
42
10
48%
44
8
WEITE.
COLLEGE DEG
Men Wom Yes No
--0 J~i5 43% 45% 47%
C 46 46 44
8 11 10 9
Wi-lITE.
Men Wom Wht Blk Hsp
52% 40% 46% 51% 51%
40 49 45 43 37
8 11 10 6 12
HAVE "(IDS <18 YRS
InPubl~c
Yes School
49% 50%
38 38
13 12
45. Has the rece~t ~ass shooting ~ade yo~ ~ore likely to s~pport stricter g~n laws, less
likely to support stricter gun laws, or hasn't it had an impact either way?
More likely
Less .likely
No impact
D~/NA
More likely
Less likely
No impact
DK/NA
More l~ kely
Less likely
No irn.pact
iJK/NA
Tot
56%
6
35
3
AGE IN
18-34
51%
5
41
3
Gun
HsHld
42%
9
44
Ii
Rep uem :=n.d
40% 79% 52%
11 3 6
44 18 "2
5 1
YRS.
35-49 50-64 65+
52% 54% 62%
5 8 4
41 35 29
.L 3 4
DENSITY.
City Sdbc:rb K;Jral
59% 56% '-;8%
6 4 13
33 38 36
3 2 3
WHITE ..... .
COLLEGl': DEG
Men Wom Yes ]\io
45% 65% 50% 5C%
8 5 5 7
45 27 44 39
2 3 2 4
WHITE.
Me:-, Wo:n Wht Slk Hsp
37% 60% 50% 77% 62%
7 5 6 6 5
52 32 4:'. 15 30
3 3 3 2 3
HAV2 K1iJS <18 YRS
InPublic
Yes School
54% 55%
7 9
36 34
2 2
16
46. Is being the victim of a mass shooting something you personally worry aboc~ or not?
WHITE ..... .
COL~EGE DEG
Tot ~ep DeIT, :;:nd JV:e'1 Worn Yes No
Yes/Worry 42% 37% 53% 38% 33% 50% 31% 39%
No 57 62 45 61 66 49 68 60
DK/NA 1 2 -1 1 1 ~
AGE IN YRS. WHITE . . .
18-34 35-49 50-64 657 Men Worn Wht 31k Hsp
Yes/Worry 54% 53% 38% 31% 26% 42% 35% 51% 6l%
No 45 46 61 68 74 56 64 45 39
DK/NA 1 1 1 1 1 1 L1 ~
HAVE KIDS <18 YRS
Gun DENSITY. InPublic
HsHld City Suburb Rural Yes School
Yes/Worry 34% 48% Li ~ 9-• ~ 0 30% 52% 52%
No 65 52 58 68 47 !J7
DK/NA 1 1 1 2 2 2
17
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXP:RES
TO FILE REhEARING MOTION
AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF.
NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION
OF AMERICA, INC., UNIFIED
SPORTSMEN OF FLORIDA, INC.,
W. DAVID TUCKER, SR., and
JOHN DOE,
Appellants,
vs.
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI,
Appellee.
Opinion filed March 20,
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
THIRD DISTRICT
JANUARY TERM, A.D. 2002
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
2002.
CASE NO. 3001-1027
LOWER TRIBUNAL
CASE NO. 00-17530
An appeal from the Circui t Court of Miami-Dade County, Thomas
S. Wilson, Jr., Judge.
Montero, Finizio, Velasquez & Reyes (Ft. Lauderdale); Stephen
P. Halbrook (Fairfax, Virginia), for appellants.
Nagin, Gallop & Figueredo and Earl G. Gallop, for City of
South Miami; Paul F. Hancock, Deputy Attorney General; Parker D.
Thomson, Special Assistant Attorney General; Michael J. Neimand,
Assistant Attorney General, as amicus curiae for Attorney General
Robert A. Butterworth, for appellee.
Before COPE, FLETCHER, and RAMIREZ, JJ.
FLETCHER, Judge.
The Ka~ional Ri~le Association and others have appeale6 the
Miami, conclL:iding that this action for declaratory judgment is not
ripe for determination . Involved is City of South Miami ordinance
14-00-1716, regulating firearms by establishing certain safety
standards therefor. The declaration the appellants are seeking
includes a determination that the City's ordinance is ul tra vires
because the legislature expressly preempted the entire field of
firearm and ammuni tion regulation by enactment of section 790.33,
Florida Statutes (2000). This statute reads in pertinent part:
" (1) PREEMPTION. -Except as expressly provided by
general law, the Legislature hereby declares that
it is occupying the whole field of regulation of
firearms and ammunition, including the purchase,
sale, ~ransfer, taxation, manufacture, ownership,
possession, and transportation thereof, to the
exclusion of all existing and future county, city,
town, or municipal ordinances or regulations
relating thereto. Any such existing ordinances are
hereby declared null and void.
(3) POLICY AND INTENT.
(a) It is the intent of this section to
provide uniform firearms laws in the state; to
declare all ordinances and regulations null
and void which have been enacted by any
jurisdictions other than state and federal,
which regulate firearms, ammunition, or
components thereof; to prohibi t the enactment
of any future ordinances or regulations
rela ting to firearms, aIl1J.lluni tion or components
thereof G.nless specifically authorized by this
section or general law; and to require local
jurisdictions to enforce state firearms laws. "
In Penelas v. Arrr.s Technoloay, Ir;c., 778 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 3d DCA),
2
rev. denied, 799 So. 2d 218 (Fia. 2001), this court specifically
stated that the legislature, through section 790.33, has indeed
expressly pree~pted the entire field of firearm and aM~unition
regulation.
Authority for the state courts to render declaratory judgments
regarding municipal ordinances may be found in section 86.021,
Florida Statutes (2000):
"Any person whose rights are
af=ected by ~unicipal ordinance
may have determined any question of
validity arising under such. . municipal
ordinance and obtain a declaration of
rights thereunder."
In the recent Florida Supreme Court decision construing
Chapter 86, Florida Statutes, Olive v. Maas, 27 Fla.L.Weekly S139
(Fla. Feb. 14, 2002), the court made it clear that the Declaratory
Judgment Act is to be liberally construed. The court cited and
quoted from X Corp. v. Y Person, 622 So. 2d 1098, 1100 (Fla. 2d
DCA), rev. denied, 618 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 1993):
"The goals of the Declaratory Judgment Act are
to relieve litigants of the common law rule
that a declaration of rights cannot be
adjudicated unless a right has been violated
and to render practical help in ending
controversies which have not reached the stage
where other legal relief lS immediately
available. To operate within this sphere of
anticipatory and preventive justice, the
Declaratory Judgment Act should be liberally
construed."
Here we have various well-~cea::-:.ing litigants eye-ball to eye-
ball across counsel table, the Ci ty wondering whether its ordinance
3
has been preemp~ed or whether it can enforce its own collective
will over firearms, others wondering whether they are going to be
illegally prosecuted by the Ci ty come next dove hunting season, and
the Florida Attorney General wondering whether the judiciary will
agree with his opinion on municipal regulation of firearms (AGO
2000-42). In light of these doubts and confrontations and in the
liberal spirit of the Declaratory Judgment Act, we hold that this
action is not premature and that the trial court erred in entering
its final sUIDlclary judgment for the City. We also hold that the
City's ordinance no. 14-00-1716 is null and void as it is in
conflict with section 790.33, Florida Statutes. We remand this
case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent
herewith.
Reversed and remanded.