Carrying and Possession of Weapons and Firearms:
HB 31 is a broad firearms and weapons bill that would substantially rewrite Florida’s laws governing concealed carry, open carry, and possession of firearms in vehicles and sensitive places. The bill would prohibit carrying a concealed handgun or an unconcealed firearm without a license and would require a person carrying such a weapon to have valid identification on hand and present it to law enforcement on demand, with a $25 noncriminal fine for violating that requirement. At the same time, it would legalize open carry of otherwise lawful firearms and electric weapons/devices, while retaining penalties for unlawful open carry in other circumstances. It also revises the concealed weapon licensing process, removes certain fee-collection provisions, and updates the list of places where firearms remain prohibited.
The bill would also repeal Florida’s risk protection order law, eliminate several related statutory provisions, and conform multiple other statutes to the new framework. It would change school-related firearm rules, remove a school district’s ability to restrict firearms in vehicles under specified circumstances, and revise vehicle-carry protections. In addition, it would update definitions and exemptions for certain law enforcement-related personnel, including adding judges to the definition of “law enforcement officer” for chapter 790 purposes and expanding protections for tactical medical professionals working with law enforcement. The bill also makes conforming changes to criminal history, juvenile fingerprinting, and expunction/sealing statutes by adding open carry offenses to the list of offenses that trigger fingerprinting and affect record relief eligibility.
If enacted, HB 31 would significantly alter state firearms policy by moving Florida toward a more permissive open-carry regime while simultaneously tightening identification and licensing-related requirements for concealed or unconcealed carry. It would also affect state agencies, sheriffs, tax collectors, schools, courts, and law enforcement by changing administrative procedures, prohibited locations, and recordkeeping rules. The bill’s repeal of the risk protection order statute would remove a major civil process currently used to temporarily restrict firearm access for individuals deemed dangerous.
The overall sentiment reflected in the available context is limited because the bill was withdrawn before introduction and there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes. Based on the text, the measure is clearly framed as a pro–Second Amendment proposal, with legislative findings emphasizing the fundamental right to keep and bear arms and criticizing bans on open carry. Because it never advanced, there is no recorded legislative debate in the provided materials, but the scope of the bill suggests it would likely have drawn strong attention from both gun-rights supporters and gun-violence-prevention advocates.
The most notable points of contention are the legalization of open carry, the repeal of risk protection orders, the requirement to carry identification while armed, and the changes to firearm restrictions in schools, government meetings, and other sensitive places. The bill also raises policy questions about whether judges should be treated as law enforcement officers for weapons-law purposes and whether tactical medical professionals should receive law-enforcement-like carry authority and legal protections. These provisions would likely be the most debated because they expand some firearm rights while preserving or reshaping certain restrictions and enforcement mechanisms.
HB 31 would make major changes to Chapter 790, Florida Statutes, by revising definitions, licensing rules, carry restrictions, prohibited locations, vehicle possession rules, and penalties related to firearms and weapons. It would repeal the state’s risk protection order law and several related provisions, and it would conform multiple criminal justice and juvenile statutes to account for open carry and other revised firearm offenses. The bill would affect gun owners, concealed carry license applicants, law enforcement agencies, schools, courts, tax collectors, and state criminal history systems by changing both substantive rights and administrative procedures.
No committee debate or vote record is available, and the bill was withdrawn prior to introduction, so there is no formal legislative sentiment reflected in votes or transcripts. The bill text itself is strongly supportive of firearm rights and open carry, presenting the measure as a constitutional protection of the right to keep and bear arms. In practical terms, the proposal appears designed to appeal to gun-rights advocates, while likely prompting opposition from those concerned about public safety, school safety, and the elimination of risk protection orders.
The most contentious provisions are likely the legalization of open carry, the repeal of risk protection orders, and the requirement that armed individuals carry valid identification and show it to law enforcement on demand. Additional flashpoints include the removal of school district authority over firearms in vehicles, the expansion of carry permissions for judges and tactical medical professionals, and the revised list of sensitive places where firearms remain prohibited. These issues pit gun-rights supporters, who would view the bill as restoring constitutional carry protections, against gun-safety and public-safety advocates, who would likely object to reduced restrictions and the loss of civil intervention tools.