Florida bill could hand gun owners huge win, make the US a constitutional carry majority country

[AlexanderA]

"Constitutional carry"? I can see nothing in the Constitution that addresses concealed carry. Open carry, on the other hand, is implied both by the 2nd Amendment's Militia Clause, and the use of the word "to bear." "Bearing arms," in the 18th century, meant doing so openly, and probably in some sort of military formation. Concealed carrying was not "bearing."

 

[PapaG]

Not to be Debbie Downer, but Illinois has to get past a tougher problem than "Const carry". We have to save all our " assault" weapons, of which most of us have and will become felons if the fat boy's ban stands.

 

[AlexanderA]

Not to be Debbie Downer, but Illinois has to get past a tougher problem than "Const carry". We have to save all our " assault" weapons, of which most of us have and will become felons if the fat boy's ban stands.

Exactly. I always say, "you can't carry what you can't own." The right to have the weapon comes first. Then we can quibble about the mechanics of carrying it.

 

[usaral63]

Keep, in the venacular of the 18th Century connotes ownership........ie: keeping livestock. To possess et al.

 

[AlexanderA]

Keep, in the venacular of the 18th Century connotes ownership........ie: keeping livestock. To possess et al.

I don't know about that. You could, in theory, "own" something but not "keep" it -- such as by being required to store your guns in the local armory. The modern analogue is buying a machine gun (that is, paying for it, at which point you "own" it), but not being able to take possession until the ATF approval comes through. The meaning of "keep," in the 2nd Amendment, has not been litigated. It seems to imply personal possession.

I believe that in the 2nd Amendment, "keeping" goes beyond mere ownership. It implies not only possession, but the responsibility that goes with it. For example, if you "keep" livestock, that includes the obligation to feed the livestock, as well as making sure it's penned in. For the most part, we don't have free range cattle any more. The argument can be made that we shouldn't have "free range" guns either. In other words, we could require tight personal control over one's own guns (storage requirements, etc.).

 

[dannyd]

We will see how things turn out. AlexanderA, I wish the Commonwealth of Virginia better times too; Young people probably wonder what is causing that vibration in ground as they drive down East Cork Street in Winchester. That would be Mr. Harry Byrd Sr. rolling in his grave at Mount Hebron.

 

[AlexanderA]

AlexanderA, I wish the Commonwealth of Virginia better times too;

In Virginia, we have permitless open carry, and concealed permits are easy to get. The only drawback that I can see is that if you have a concealed permit, it's in the police database and available to any officer that might pull you over for a traffic stop. This may or may not be a problem, depending on the officer and whether you are a member of an ethnic minority. It would be better to have complete permitless carry, but that's life.

As far as further gun laws, we have a complete stalemate. Nothing is going to get through, either pro or con. Three years ago, when the Democrats had the trifecta (governorship and both houses of the legislature), they tried to push through an assault weapons ban (with no grandfathering!). My state senator, Chap Petersen (a Democrat), broke ranks and voted against it, and it failed. Now he's being challenged in his primary, from the left, precisely because of that vote. This is an example of the Democrats (few and far between, granted) that we should be supporting.

 

[dannyd]

I know a great deal about Virginia; met both Harry Sr. and Harry Jr. my cousin is Turner Ashby both him and his brother are at Mount Hebron with my grandparents and aunts. My great grandpa's rode with Ashby's cavalry; my great uncle rode with John Mosby. Patsy Cline played with me as a baby because Mr. Dick played softball with my father.

 

[Paul7]

I honestly do not understand open carry. I understand the law but disagree with open carry in practice.
Let me try this. I am a life long motorcyclist. I choose to wear a helmet. Damn them for telling me I have to.
I do not oppose open carry laws. I will not walk about with an open carry gun that screams TAKE ME.

I don't get it either. I moved to FL from NM five months ago, they had open carry there and I only did it once, I remember getting lots of stares. I can just see some perp coming up behind a person open carrying and grabbing their piece. Although it was funny to see patriots open carrying ARs in the state capital building when gun control bills were being proposed, very effective at triggering liberals.

Hoping they get constitutional carry soon so I don't have to go through the permit hoops here.

Does anyone know if this would enable you to carry in your car console? I don't think you can now in FL unless you have a permit. In NM you could, your car and bike were considered an extension of your home.

 

[dannyd]

I don't get it either. I moved to FL from NM five months ago, they had open carry there and I only did it once, I remember getting lots of stares. I can just see some perp coming up behind a person open carrying and grabbing their piece. Although it was funny to see patriots open carrying ARs in the state capital building when gun control bills were being proposed, very effective at triggering liberals.

Hoping they get constitutional carry soon so I don't have to go through the permit hoops here.

Does anyone know if this would enable you to carry in your car console? I don't think you can now in FL unless you have a permit. In NM you could, your car and bike were considered an extension of your home.

Please, go and get your permit in the long run it will help you out. Florida state government is like a pendulum Light Red today and Dark Blue tomorrow.

 

[Paul7]

Please, go and get your permit in the long run it will help you out. Florida state government is like a pendulum Light Red today and Dark Blue tomorrow.

The trend is in our favor, more registered GOP voters for the first time ever.

 

[pharmer]

Does anyone know if this would enable you to carry in your car console? I don't think you can now in FL unless you have a permit.

If'n you don't have a permit you need to have an "intermediate step." Loaded in glove box is OK, loaded in snapped holster is OK. Permit now is so easy here compared to 1988 when I got mine. Go to one of Khaled's gunshows around the state, it's around $100 and you can enjoy a $7 lemonade while browsing. Welcome to Florida by the way, we all "escaped" (NJ for me,43 years ago) from somewhere. Joe

 

[dannyd]

The trend is in our favor, more registered GOP voters for the first time ever.

The new Republicans are like Mr. Reagan and Mr. Trump; old Democrats with no where else to go. They are Not Conservatives, so they may not be much help with the Gun Laws or that bill in the Capital would have already passed.

 

[Paul7]

Welcome to Florida by the way, we all "escaped" (NJ for me,43 years ago) from somewhere. Joe

Thank you, sir, 2 new very conservative votes for FL in my household. Very nice feeling not to have to worry about what crackpot schemes a liberal governor and legislature could spring on me. Am originally from IL, which has basically become CA without the good weather.

Funny here in Broward Co., supposedly a liberal place, to see conservative/Trump stuff in souvenier stores.

 

[Paul7]

The new Republicans are like Mr. Reagan and Mr. Trump; old Democrats with no where else to go. They are Not Conservatives, so they may not be much help with the Gun Laws or that bill in the Capital would have already passed.

Let's take what we can now and go for more later. At least they aren't trying to pass an AWB or something.

 

[wayneinFL]

If'n you don't have a permit you need to have an "intermediate step." Loaded in glove box is OK, loaded in snapped holster is OK. Permit now is so easy here compared to 1988 when I got mine. Go to one of Khaled's gunshows around the state, it's around $100 and you can enjoy a $7 lemonade while browsing. Welcome to Florida by the way, we all "escaped" (NJ for me,43 years ago) from somewhere. Joe

To clarify-

I see things like "intermediate step" or "two step rule", etc. The way it's written is it has to be securely encased OR not readily accessible, and glove box, holster, gun case are specifically allowed.

(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.

Definitions:

(16) “Readily accessible for immediate use” means that a firearm or other weapon is carried on the person or within such close proximity and in such a manner that it can be retrieved and used as easily and quickly as if carried on the person.
(17) “Securely encased” means in a glove compartment, whether or not locked; snapped in a holster; in a gun case, whether or not locked; in a zippered gun case; or in a closed box or container which requires a lid or cover to be opened for access.

 

[Aim1]

Update:

Passed the House and now goes to the Senate where it's expected to pass and then on to DeSantis signature.


Sadly the open carry amendment got removed.

 

[dannyd]

That was a Show Amendment; probably put in by a guy in a weak district, so he could say look what I did.

 

[pharmer]

"Constitutional carry" is a good thing. Freedom comes with responsibilities. I have been here for 43 years and in the past armed folks tended to seek "adequate proficiency." At the range these days it is painfully obvious that folks are buying guns "just because" and have no idea how to utilize them safely/effectively. Look for that to increase when the law changes. Back in 1988 when I got my permit there was a full day "training requirement" (4 hrs classroom,4hrs range) that included a box of .38 reloads. Out of 12 students there were 4 or 5 Brinks guards who needed 98/150 to pass. All except 1 needed to "stay after" to try again. Civilians didn't need a "passing score" and the shooting was horrendous. State of Florida assumes "proficiency" with those seeking a permit today. I am as "pro-freedom" as a man could get and give open invitations to folks around me to join me at the range. Most don't make it, including my wife with her permit for 10 years. She relies on a geezer (me) for protection as well as "good karma" to provide protection. Joe

 

[dannyd]

What he said ^^^^^^^^^! but also the NRA pistol course has gone to downhill too.

 

[wayneinFL]

Florida's requirement to "safely discharge a firearm" could really be done away with. The one shot requirement isn't enough to tell you anything about whether someone can shoot. And it's not like FDACS seriously enforces even the most basic one shot requirement, as long as they get their money.

I see most people at the range banging away with full size guns at a silhouette at 5 yards. It seems like a waste of money. You should be able to shut your eyes and hit a silhouette at 5 yards. A person with limited skill should be able to hit an 8" plate at 25 yards, at least most of the time.

But to put it into perspective, most of these people aren't going to shoot back in the .00001% chance they end up in a situation where it would be justified to ahoot at 25 yards. It takes little skill to hit within usual self defense distances.

I'm more worried about whether they're safe. But it's been legal to buy a handgun in FL since forever without training. It's legal to drive around with a loaded gun in the glovebox without training- been that way since at least the 40s or 50s. And it doesn't seem to be a problem.

 

[AlexanderA]

But to put it into perspective, most of these people aren't going to shoot back in the .00001% chance they end up in a situation where it would be justified to shoot at 25 yards. It takes little skill to hit within usual self defense distances.

I'm more worried about whether they're safe. But it's been legal to buy a handgun in FL since forever without training. It's legal to drive around with a loaded gun in the glovebox without training- been that way since at least the 40s or 50s. And it doesn't seem to be a problem.

What percentage of people carrying guns will actually use them for self defense? The number, relatively speaking, has to be minuscule. As for the rest, the gun is a psychological crutch. If that "crutch" makes them feel more secure, I'm OK with that.

The main thing that carry training needs to teach is not shooting, but when not to shoot. I'm worried that with "constitutional carry," more people will be carrying without being aware of their legal obligations. Here in Virginia, the training requirement for a carry license does not include mandatory range time.

 

[wayneinFL]

What percentage of people carrying guns will actually use them for self defense? The number, relatively speaking, has to be minuscule. As for the rest, the gun is a psychological crutch. If that "crutch" makes them feel more secure, I'm OK with that.

The main thing that carry training needs to teach is not shooting, but when not to shoot. I'm worried that with "constitutional carry," more people will be carrying without being aware of their legal obligations. Here in Virginia, the training requirement for a carry license does not include mandatory range time.

Yeah, they need to know when not to shoot. It's weird that it can be a problem, because it's common sense. My mom saw a news article and couldn't understand why the shooter was in trouble, because the guy he shot was trespassing. I had to tell her you can't shoot someone for trespassing. It's a little scary that someone like that could purchase a firearm and keep it for defensive purposes in their home or business, or drive all over the state in their car with it.

But in a state with 21 million mostly untrained people, there doesn't seem to be much of a problem with untrained people shooting people. I think we'll be okay if some of them start carrying.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the way Virginia does it. I have a Virginia permit. Felt like I got everything I needed from an online course.

 

[Will Munny]

So when the price of fuel and energy go up the producer eats all of that as well?

The current price of eggs and other grocery items don't agree with this idea

Wrong, first you are no longer talking about a tax. Second, you are assuming mutual exclusivity where it does not exist. And third, you are trying to draw conclusions by looking at a singular data point that cannot possibly contradict what I have already explained.
Yes producers must eat some of the change, to the extent that demand is elastic. Just because prices are rising for the consumer does not mean that producers have not also lost surplus. Those things are not mutually exclusive. Fuel as an input going up in price will shift the supply curve, not the demand curve. Mathematically this means total surplus must have shrunk. And further, only in the case of a perfectly inelastic demand does that reduction in total surplus come only from consumers. This applies to theme park tickets, groceries, and yes, even firearms and ammunition.

 

[Paul7]

To clarify-

I see things like "intermediate step" or "two step rule", etc. The way it's written is it has to be securely encased OR not readily accessible, and glove box, holster, gun case are specifically allowed.

(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.

Definitions:

(16) “Readily accessible for immediate use” means that a firearm or other weapon is carried on the person or within such close proximity and in such a manner that it can be retrieved and used as easily and quickly as if carried on the person.
(17) “Securely encased” means in a glove compartment, whether or not locked; snapped in a holster; in a gun case, whether or not locked; in a zippered gun case; or in a closed box or container which requires a lid or cover to be opened for access.

So unlocked glove compartment is OK, but not the center console, correct?