Looking for some info on floridas preemption law. Here in KY. our preemption law forbids local government from prohibiting public employees from carrying while in the course of their duties. (Trashman, meter readers, city clerks, etc) Does Florida law allow cities and counties the right to prohibit their employees from carrying while on the clock?
I know you asked about Florida State preemption on firearms. But if you looking for good, solid, model language, you might check out Utah's State Preemption law at 76-10-500
. Some addemdums providing both a little authority and some implicit restrictions to/on colleges can be found at 53b-3-103
In simple terms, these sections say that all authority to regulate firearms is reserved to the State legislature except in cases where the legislature has granted specific authority to some other entity to deal with firearms. No government entity, including counties, cities, agencies, departments, school districts, public colleges, etc, can pass, maintain, nor enforce any rule, ordinance, nor policy that has the effect of restricting individual access to or possession of firearms, except as the legislature has explicitly permitted.
As some examples: the legislature has granted specific authority to the DWR to regulate what firearms may be used during various hunts. However, DWR does not have authority to regulate firearms carried for self-defense and carried pursuant to a permit-to-carry even if that gun is carried during a hunt, by a hunter, as long as the hunter doesn't use the gun for hunting.
Cities can regulate hunting and the discharge of firearms within their borders, but may not otherwise restrict or regulate firearms.
Colleges may create a single, secure hearing room where guns may be banned, but may not otherwise regulate firearms. (In Utah, colleges fall under our State GFSZ law and so a permit to carry--from any jurisdiction in the nation--is required to legally carry.)
The agency that runs prisons has explicit authority to ban weapons from the prison, for obvious reasons.
Any law, rule, ordinance, policy, etc promulgated by a local government authority that conflicts with State gun laws is null, void, and unenforceable.
So the lady behind the desk at the department of motor vehicles might be carrying. A public school teacher may well be carrying to school, and several of our local instructors have taken to given free permit classes to school employees to encourage them to do just that. Professors, students, or visitors at our public colleges and universities may be carrying.
State preemption was upheld against State colleges by our State's highest court in "University of Utah v Shurtleff" in 2006.
(The same case, heard by a lower State court in 2003, went in favor of the colleges. There was a small but important change in our State preemption law to specifically cover colleges by preemption between 2003 and 2006. Gave our highest court no real choice but to uphold State preemption. One judge still dissented in favor of the gun banners at the colleges.)
It took a little pushing to get some agencies to comply with these laws. But we are pretty well there now. Some of the pushing including having the legislature call agency/department heads in to defend their rules and polices. In Utah, all exec rules have to be re-authorized by the legislature every year or two. This is normally a pro-forma rubber stamp. But Utah's gun owners (and a couple of the other leading activists/lobbyists) persuaded a couple of legislators to do an in-depth review of a couple of rules that violated State preemption. In most cases, that was enough for agencies to fix their rules. In one case, it had a nice side effect. By rule--not law, but rule--Utah used to be a "duty to inform" State. Our department of public safety lost all their rules for a year when a legislator managed to put a hold on re-approving those particular rules. By the time the next re-approval cycle rolled around, DPS was persuaded they could live without a duty to inform on permit holders if they could just get their other rules back.
Any quarter given in State preemption laws will likely be abused by some low-level tin hat type. A solid preemption law, with a couple of RKBA-friendly legislators willing to yank in department heads for public hearings on why they are creating or maintaining rules that violate State law can go a long way.
Our only notable exception is our courts. The State judiciary has asserted constitutional authority as an independent branch of government to maintain and enforce rules regarding guns independent of legislative authority.
This is relevant because taking a gun into a legislatively defined "secure" area is a felony. However, the courts have declined to provide the lockers required to make courtrooms such an area. So taking a gun into a courtroom is not a felony nor otherwise a violation of State law. But it is treated as contempt of court.