November 19, 2008, 12:12 PM
According to this, it is, but can someone find the relevant statute? I would be carrying on my belt, clearly visible to anyone who was paying attention.
No, not as a weapon. I just like my knife, you know?
November 19, 2008, 02:50 PM
Here you go:
790.053 Open carrying of weapons.--
(1) Except as otherwise provided by law and in subsection (2), it is unlawful for any person to openly carry on or about his or her person any firearm or electric weapon or device.
(2) A person may openly carry, for purposes of lawful self-defense:
(a) A self-defense chemical spray.
(b) A nonlethal stun gun or dart-firing stun gun or other nonlethal electric weapon or device that is designed solely for defensive purposes.
(3) Any person violating this section commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
November 19, 2008, 03:12 PM
..it is unlawful for any person to openly carry on or about his or her person any...electric weapon or device.
...A person may openly carry, for purposes of lawful self-defense... A ...nonlethal electric weapon or device that is designed solely for defensive purposes.
LOL, Florida has already outlawed carrying phasers.
November 19, 2008, 04:29 PM
No law prohibiting carring a fixed blade knife openly in Florida. Gutmacher even mentions this in his book (which you should buy, rather than relying on the internet).
If you want to walk down the street wearing a broadsword and carrying a crossbow, you're technically legal. Cops may not like it, of course, and may decide to find some other way to harass or charge you.
November 19, 2008, 07:25 PM
There are other laws which can be used to enforce this.
(1) A person who exhibits any sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, destructive device, or other weapon as defined in s. 790.001(13), including a razor blade, box cutter, or common pocketknife, except as authorized in support of school-sanctioned activities, in the presence of one or more persons in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner and not in lawful self-defense, at a school-sponsored event or on the grounds or facilities of any school, school bus, or school bus stop, or within 1,000 feet of the real property that comprises a public or private elementary school, middle school, or secondary school, during school hours or during the time of a sanctioned school activity, commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. This subsection does not apply to the exhibition of a firearm or weapon on private real property within 1,000 feet of a school by the owner of such property or by a person whose presence on such property has been authorized, licensed, or invited by the owner.
Define "rude" or "careless" and you see the leeway here. Where in most towns are you more than 1,000 feet from any school, school bus, or school bus stop? The only way out of this one is to be the holder of a CCW. Of course, then there is also 790.10 to worry about:
If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
That assumes that you are not carrying the weapon while in your car, because doing so can be illegal carrying of a concealed weapon:
790.001 (3)(a) "Concealed weapon" means any dirk, metallic knuckles, slungshot, billie, tear gas gun, chemical weapon or device, or other deadly weapon carried on or about a person in such a manner as to conceal the weapon from the ordinary sight of another person.
(13) "Weapon" means any dirk, knife, metallic knuckles, slungshot, billie, tear gas gun, chemical weapon or device, or other deadly weapon except a firearm or a common pocketknife, plastic knife, or blunt-bladed table knife.
790.01 (1) Except as provided in subsection (4), a person who carries a concealed weapon or electric weapon or device on or about his or her person commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(5) POSSESSION IN PRIVATE CONVEYANCE.--Notwithstanding subsection (2), it is lawful and is not a violation of s. 790.01 for a person 18 years of age or older to possess a concealed firearm or other weapon for self-defense or other lawful purpose within the interior of a private conveyance, without a license, if the firearm or other weapon is securely encased or is otherwise not readily accessible for immediate use. Nothing herein contained prohibits the carrying of a legal firearm other than a handgun anywhere in a private conveyance when such firearm is being carried for a lawful use. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to authorize the carrying of a concealed firearm or other weapon on the person. This subsection shall be liberally construed in favor of the lawful use, ownership, and possession of firearms and other weapons, including lawful self-defense as provided in s. 776.012.
Read this, and remember that a court may decide to rule that if you carry the knife on your person, and that knife is not in the ordinary sight of people outside the vehicle, this could be carrying a concealed weapon. The way out of this is to have a CCW.
November 19, 2008, 07:45 PM
The "1000 foot rule" around schools got tossed by the courts as being unenforcably vague.
This subsection shall be liberally construed in favor of the lawful use, ownership, and possession of firearms and other weapons, including lawful self-defense as provided in s. 776.012.
Better haul out S. 776.012 and see what it says. It sux that you need an attorney on retainer to lawfully carry a pocket knife.
November 19, 2008, 09:51 PM
It was the FEDERAL 1,000 foot rule that was struck down, not the State law. 776.012 does not apply:
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.--A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.