New Florida Laws

Taking effect today. http://www.northescambia.com/2013/10/new-laws-today-texting-ban-ebt-limits-funeral-protests-late-night-massages

Here is a few from the article.

This law's for you (Westboro Baptist Church). HB-15 No protesting within 500 feet of a funeral.

SB-50 Public meetings must have time allotted for public comments.

Bill #? No texting while driving, okay at red lights.

HB - 7005 No Massage establishments open from midnight to 5 a.m. DAMN  

HB 691: Identification theft. The law makes it a first-degree misdemeanor to possess the personal identification information — such as Social Security numbers, driver licenses, passport information and credit card numbers — of four or fewer people, and a third-degree felony to possess five or more. There are exemptions for parents, guardians and certain government employees. Personally, I think it should be a felony to have ANY unauthorized IDs. A misdemeanor... really?

Eric wrote:

Taking effect today.  http://www.northescambia.com/2013/10/new-laws-today-texting-ban-ebt-limits-funeral-protests-late-night-massages

Here is a few from the article.

This law's for you (Westboro Baptist Church).   HB-15 No protesting within 500 feet of a funeral.

SB-50 Public meetings must have time allotted for public comments.

Bill #? No texting while driving, okay at red lights.

HB - 7005 No Massage establishments open from midnight to 5 a.m.  DAMN  

HB 691: Identification theft. The law makes it a first-degree misdemeanor to possess the personal identification information — such as Social Security numbers, driver licenses, passport information and credit card numbers — of four or fewer people, and a third-degree felony to possess five or more. There are exemptions for parents, guardians and certain government employees.  Personally, I think it should be a felony to have ANY unauthorized IDs.  A misdemeanor... really?

Only question is the 'texting'...AGREE that texting while driving is dangerous and should never be done...During the duration of someone driving...how will it be possible to determine that during a 20 minute trip that a driver texted twice but it was at a red light?..Will the driver be expected to provide their personal phone to incriminate themselves?...Now for a traffic crash that's different because the phone may obtain evidence needed for an investigation but wonder if requesting to see a driver's phone will be standard operating procedures in many traffic offenses...If so will an officer that observes what they think is a driver texting going to be a reason for a traffic stop?...May be a can of worms here.....Agree about the ID's two maybe a misdemeanor (although there's no reason to have two) but someone could feasibly have an ID and then get a state license...but more than what may be an honest error should be a higher degree...AGREE 100% with the law about protesting near a funeral....

Regarding the ID thing, I was under the impression that the law referred to having SOMEONE ELSE'S IDs... as in identity theft.  Maybe I was wrong about that.  

If someone ruined my bank account, my retirement account, my reputation (such as it is, lol), through Identity Theft, I would hope it would be more than a damn misdemeanor charge against the dirtbag that did it.  There is not much of a deterrent there if Florida is saying you can screw up multiple people's lives and it only be a misdemeanor.  I know, possessing the IDs don't constitute Identity Theft, but it surely means that there is intent to perpetrate Identity Theft.

Eric wrote:

Regarding the ID thing, I was under the impression that the law referred to having SOMEONE ELSE'S IDs... as in identity theft.  Maybe I was wrong about that.  

If someone ruined my bank account, my retirement account, my reputation (such as it is, lol), through Identity Theft, I would hope it would be more than a damn misdemeanor charge against the dirtbag that did it.  There is not much of a deterrent there if Florida is saying you can screw up multiple people's lives and it only be a misdemeanor.  I know, possessing the IDs don't constitute Identity Theft, but it surely means that there is intent to perpetrate Identity Theft.

I know that there are already laws on the book for possessing more than one form of ID but with the increase of identity theft the laws would have to be updated kind of like the laws that had to be updated for electronic crimes due to the popularity and usuage of cell phones and other electronic devices...

I IMAGINE if it involves interstate crime, it's a felony and the FBI and federal marshals would get involved.. I'm NOT sure about that though..

I've -- sooo happily! -- just moved to a Consitutional Carry state... "YAY" for me! And I moved out of stoopif California just in time, as they just outlawed lead ammo.

Happy to read that Florida has outlawed WBC from protesting within 500 foot of a funeral... only wish the distance was further, those dirty so-and-so's!

I have the same questions as MediaWatcher regarding texting while driving... would be interesting to read the text of the law, as passed.

I have to wonder why one can have FOUR id's... I can only see reason for a person to legally have two at one time, either during marriage or divorce. And as someone who has been a victim of financial fraud, it does concern me some. Can anyone think of a valid reason for FOUR?? :-/

Welcome back Ricieeeeeee.. Where did you move to?

Jake92 wrote:

Welcome back Ricieeeeeee..  Where did you move to?

Danke! Moved to Alaska. Eat yer heart out  !!

I'll be there to meet you one of these years.... Keep your guns loaded for bear....

Jake92 wrote:

I'll be there to meet you one of these years....  Keep your guns loaded for bear....

You know I am! Hell, I didn't even have too much trouble going through the Canadian border this time around! I got some grief for my Gun Owners of America sticker, for an ammo can that serves as my console and for some (very unfortunate) loose ammo that was found rolling around underneath my seat, but at least they didn't tear apart my pickup this time around... that's a win for me.

 

I'll have my 45 loaded and ready within reach..

Jake92 wrote:

I'll have my 45 loaded and ready within reach..

My 5-yr old niece is in my cabin tonight so mine are locked up, safe and sound.  

Ask around and see what they think of a 45 for protection against a bear.. I just want it for the protection, NOT for hunting.. I get opinions saying it's more than enough and others saying I need something with more power..

Jake92 wrote:

Ask around and see what they think of a 45 for protection against a bear..  I just want it for the protection, NOT for hunting..  I get opinions saying it's more than enough and others saying I need something with more power..

I already know, because I asked before I moved up here. A .45 ain't gonna do much of shit against these bears, moose, etc. I mean, yeah... I'll still carry my .40 to slow one down in the event that I am charged, but no, it will not likely kill one, and neither will a .45, more than likely.

OK TY I have a good 45 with hollow points and copper jacketed mixed in the clip..

Jake92 wrote:

OK  TY  I have a good 45 with hollow points and copper jacketed mixed in the clip..

Ya, that might help some but I was basically laughed at when I asked about protection against Alaskan bear with a .40 or a .45. As far as pistols go, lots of guys carry .50 cal Desert Eagles and the like.

I guess I'll just buy something bigger then before I get ready to go..

How were the roads getting there??

riceme wrote:

I've -- sooo happily! -- just moved to a Consitutional Carry state... "YAY" for me! And I moved out of stoopif California just in time, as they just outlawed lead ammo.

I read a while back that tungsten was going to be the next big thing with bullets.

Then they found out that long term exposure to tungsten pretty much guarantees you get cancer. I wonder if there is more data on that?

---

When I was a kid, we carried an old nail keg (@7-10 gallons in volume) to an ex-navy target practice hill. There was lots of .22 caliber slugs in that sand dune on Perdido Key. We filled up that nail keg with lead. It was so heavy, we couldn't carry that wooden keg... dragged it, I think!

You asked, Ricey.  Here you go.  House Bill 691

Quote :

CS/CS/HB 691 - Personal Identification Theft

General Bill   by Judiciary Committee and Criminal Justice Subcommittee and Ahern and Grant (CO-SPONSORS) Boyd; Smith; Young

Personal Identification Theft: Defines "personal identification information"; provides that it is unlawful for person to intentionally or knowingly possess, without authorization, any personal identification information of another person; provides penalties; provides that possession of identification information of multiple individuals gives rise to inference of illegality; provides enhanced criminal penalties for possession of such information of multiple persons; provides exemptions; creates affirmative defensives; provides that act does not preclude prosecution for unlawful possession of personal identification information of another person under any other law.

Effective Date: October 1, 2013
Last Event: Chapter No. 2013-242 on Monday, July 01, 2013 11:10 AM

 

That is more like a preface that is like a title to the bill.  I haven't found the text of the bill, but here is the Florida Statute that was created by the bill.

Quote :

817.5685 Unlawful possession of the personal identification information of another person.—
(1) As used in this section, the term “personal identification information” means a person’s social security number, official state-issued or United States-issued driver license or identification number, alien registration number, government passport number, employer or taxpayer identification number, Medicaid or food assistance account number, bank account number, credit or debit card number, and medical records.

(2) It is unlawful for a person to intentionally or knowingly possess, without authorization, the personal identification information of another person in any form, including, but not limited to, mail, physical documents, identification cards, or information stored in digital form.

(3)(a) A person who violates subsection (2) and in doing so possesses the personal identification information of four or fewer persons commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(b)1. Proof that a person used or was in possession of the personal identification information of five or more individuals, unless satisfactorily explained, gives rise to an inference that the person who used or was in possession of the personal identification information did so knowingly and intentionally without authorization.
2. A person who violates subsection (2) and in doing so possesses the personal identification information of five or more persons commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(4) Subsection (2) does not apply to:
(a) A person who is the parent or legal guardian of a child and who possesses the personal identification information of that child.
(b) A person who is the guardian of another person under chapter 744 and who is authorized to possess the personal identification information of that other person and make decisions regarding access to that personal identification information.
(c) An employee of a governmental agency who possesses the personal identification information of another person in the ordinary course of business.
(d) A person who is engaged in a lawful business and possesses the personal identification information of another person in the ordinary course of business.
(e) A person who finds a card or document issued by a governmental agency that contains the personal identification information of another person and who takes reasonably prompt action to return that card or document to its owner, to the governmental agency that issued the card or document, or to a law enforcement agency.

(5) It is an affirmative defense to an alleged violation of subsection (2) if the person who possesses the personal identification information of another person:
(a) Did so under the reasonable belief that such possession was authorized by law or by the consent of the other person; or
(b) Obtained that personal identification information from a forum or resource that is open or available to the general public or from a public record.

(6) This section does not preclude prosecution for the unlawful possession of personal identification information pursuant to s. 817.568 or any other law.
History.—s. 1, ch. 2013-242.