Assault weapons ban in Florida?

AG Moody wants to block voters from having a say

Ashley Moody is new as Florida’s attorney general. So we’re still learning who she really is.

Last week, she looked like a lackey for the gun lobby.

Moody drew cheers from the NRA when she went to court to try to block Floridians from voting on a citizenproposed amendment to ban high-capacity weapons.

Keep in mind: Moody didn’t just take a stance against the amendment and urge Floridians to vote it down. She’s trying to stop you and every other Floridian from ever getting a chance to vote on it in the first place.

She wants to win this debate by preventing it. That’s dirty pool.

And I say that as someone who’s not really a fan of this amendment.

Yes, I think this gun-control measure is flawed in a couple of key ways. (More on that in a moment.)

But that’s a debate for citizens, politicians and special interests to have at the ballot box — not one Moody should try to win for the gun groups by stifling it altogether.

Frankly, I’m sick and tired of Florida politicians trying to silence the voters’ voice and thwart the voters’ will.

You vote for lottery money to go to schools, and they divert existing funds away so schools remain underfunded. You vote for medical marijuana; they drag their feet. You vote for Fair Districts; they refuse to comply until a court forces them.

And sometimes, Florida’s politicians do what Moody’s doing here when they think they’re going to lose a debate — they try to stop the debate from ever happening.

In this case, Moody’s legal argument isn’t even a very believable one. She says the amendment is too complicated for you to understand.

First of all: Since when has any Florida politician ever cared about that? Complicated and misleading amendments are just about the only kind they put on the ballots. Last year’s ballot contained hot messes that mixed vaping with oil drilling and a “victims rights” bill that cops are still struggling to understand.

Second: This amendment isn’t complicated or misleading.

It says the state would ban “assault weapons.” It defines those weapons as rifles and shotguns capable of handling magazines with more than 10 rounds. And it says that anyone who owns an assault weapon now can keep it if the ban passes, as long

as they register it with the state.

Once again, you’re free to think that idea is an awful one. Or a wonderful one. But it’s not a complicated one.

Here’s what would be on the ballot if backers collect enough signatures:

“Prohibits possession of assault weapons, defined as semiautomatic rifles and shotguns capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition at once, either in fixed or detachable magazine, or any other ammunitionfeeding device. Possession of handguns is not prohibited. Exempts military and law enforcement personnel in their official duties. Exempts and requires

registration of assault weapons lawfully possessed prior to this provision’s effective date. Creates criminal penalties for violations of this amendment.”

Moody says the language is “not clear.”

Actually, it’s quite clear …

Because the gun group knows the public strongly supports banning weapons made for highspeed human slaughter.

“This is just another attempt to thwart the voters from having a choice,” said Patti Brigham, president of the Florida League of Women Voters and a leader of the group behind the amendment, Ban Assault Weapons Now. “Our government in Florida doesn’t want any control on guns in a state that has had

some of the biggest mass shootings in the country.

“Let Floridians decide, because it’s the Floridians who are getting killed.”

Moody spokeswoman Lauren Schenone described the ballot language as “a trick,” saying the amendment would ban “virtually every semiautomatic long gun.”

She’s right about the ban covering most long guns — which is one of the reasons I think the amendment is flawed. Instead of banning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, it would ban any gun “capable” of handling those magazines. That’s most guns. I think it’s too broad. But the amendment clearly says what it bans.

Here’s another flaw in the amendment: It only applies to long guns — not handguns.

There are pistol magazines that hold 12 rounds, 17 rounds, 20 rounds and more. When Markeith Loyd was arrested for the murder of Orlando police officer Debra Clayton, he had a 9mm Glock attached to a 50-round drum.

If this ban passed, those would still be allowed.

I think backers just didn’t want all the political heat of going after handguns. So they exempted them. That might be politically savvy, but also logically inconsistent.

Listen, I get the desire to clamp down on highcapacity weapons. I share it. These weapons aren’t meant for hunting or protection. They’re military-inspired weapons that many cops want off the streets because they’re meant to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time.

As Ben Pollara, an adviser to the amendment campaign said: “If you’re hunting, you don’t need to spray more than 10 rounds at a deer.”

That said, gun-makers will almost always come up with ways to get around new laws. So will criminals.

If Florida clamps down on current rifle designs, gun manufacturers will come up with new ones — as evidenced by the recent New York Times piece: “When lawmakers try to ban assault weapons, gunmakers adapt.”

But that’s all a debate for election season — not for a single politician to silence.