Open carry in Florida - Page 7 - Pensacola Fishing Forum

Go Back   Pensacola Fishing Forum > Hunting/Shooting Forum > Hunting Forum

Like Tree19Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-31-2014, 02:57 AM   #61
LyterKillsLing
Grouper
 
FreeDiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Gulf Breeze
Posts: 718
Default Open carry in Florida

18 and older..... I'd up that bar to where the kids have matured. I do some what agree with not paying for the taxes on concealed but at the same time, that class is making sure you understand the laws, and have at least some knowledge and a decent shot before being brushed off to carry away.... This whole open carry you see in New Orleans... Half of the morons hold the gun sideways, and fire away. That not a racist remark it's common among the G crowd... Com'mon now. The way I see it, there should be a standard of being able to carry. That's for your safety as well as anyone around you when a conflict arises.

Here a simple example. I run a fast supply boat in Louisiana. I was talking to a deckhand who is a young black man from Baton Rouge, just turned 22. We are often on the subject of guns on my boat and few of us are some what addicted to slinging lead. Anyways to get to the point.

When he told me about the open carry, believe it or not I had no idea until this year about there law. Only that my concealed partnered with their state. I asked him about what he carries, it happened to be a 45. When I asked him about how often he shoots at a range, he said I've shot a my gun two times in the 3 years I've owned it.......... Now unless it's like riding a bike... What ever direction he's pointing that canon at, is a huge hazard. I wouldn't doubt in my mind there are plenty of young guns out there that are the same. Sure open carry the way a see it is a huge bluff, an intimidation stunt as I see it. But when push comes to shuv, can he or she operate that unit safely? Or are they putting more lives at risk?

I understand it's their right, but what about another innocent bystanders life? If your gonna carry don't you think you need to be ready to think on a split second, an hit the target when your adrenalin is amping? This would be my reasoning for tractical training not just standing at a gun range.... But to each his own.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
I <3 THE POON!

Last edited by FreeDiver; 07-31-2014 at 03:01 AM.
FreeDiver is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 

Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-31-2014, 03:28 AM   #62
Senior Member
Sailfish
 
bigbulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,635
Default

And how well does all of that drivers ed training work for all of the people driving around the roads texting, eating, making phone calls, putting on makeup, attending to kids in the back seat, keeping their dog out of their lap, spilling their drink, arguing with theie spouse, spanking their kids, reading a book, etc... etc... etc...

The point is, all the training in the world isnt going to prevent idiots from being idiots. Those that take it seriously will get the training and practice with out being forced to and those that do not will take the mandatory training and never shoot again until the shtf.

Who decides who is mature or not? I know some kids i would trust with my life and i know some grown men that i wouldn't trust to walk across the street with.
__________________
Washington is playing their ignorant and ill-informed constituency like an organ grinder plays his monkey. The monkey shuts up and does what he's told, as long as he gets his banana. There is no difference in Washington. They squander the blood sweat and tears of the hard working, tax paying Americans and lie to them when they're caught. Needing their ever-increasing supply of bananas, the trained monkeys will continue to dance for their bananas.
bigbulls is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-31-2014, 08:21 AM   #63
Senior Member
Grand Slam
 
Outside9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Baker, Florida
Posts: 8,526
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyS View Post
I frequently open-carried while on duty in plain clothes with just a badge clipped to my belt - can't speak for FBI policy (although I've seen them open-carry), but I've worked with a lot of State, County, and other Federal investigators who did as well. Always with a badge on the belt or neck-chain of course, but you wouldn't have known just seeing from behind. (btw - my agency prohibited the everyday wearing of raid-jackets unless we were on a search warrant or other such official operation)

I've also lived States that had open-carry & never known of any issue. The State of Vermont (I've not lived in that one) has never required a permit for any non-felon to carry open or concealed. That's what we need nationwide .... Vermont Carry. Why should a law-abiding citizen have to prove to the government they are not a criminal & pay them a fee to exercise what is his/her Constitutional right? Anyone age 18 & over who has not been convicted of a violent felony should be allowed to carry open or concealed without having to obtain a special "permiso" from big government. It's not like people ever convicted of a violent felony & thus prohibited are gonna bother applying for one anyway.
"With the badge next to the gun"

Last edited by Outside9; 07-31-2014 at 08:24 AM.
Outside9 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-31-2014, 11:19 AM   #64
Freshwater Flounder
White Marlin
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeDiver View Post
18 and older..... I'd up that bar to where the kids have matured. I do some what agree with not paying for the taxes on concealed but at the same time, that class is making sure you understand the laws, and have at least some knowledge and a decent shot before being brushed off to carry away....
You don't have a 19 y/o daughter, I take it.

You would uphold the right of a 21 year old young woman to carry a firearm protect herself from a violent abduction/rape, carjacking, etc ... yet leave the 18, 19, or 20 year old relatively defenseless, as though they could never need to defend themselves from a violent crime.

I'm gonna speak up for young adults here for a minute. I'm 53 y/o, but I was a plenty decent shot at 18, responsible to boot - and there are plenty of responsible/mature 18 y/o's out there today and they can inadvertently find themselves in a bad situation, a bad part of town, and potential victims of violent crime as much as you or I. Your way of thinking leaves them relatively defenseless ... second class citizens in a way. Being responsible has little to do with age once one is beyond 18 ... I've known plenty of irresponsible/immature 40 year olds --- and some of them are packing ... and doubtful how emotionally stable some of them are; how well they understand the law; or how safely they can handle a firearm. Yet we somehow still manage to argue their Constitutional Rights not be infringed and hold them legally accountable for their actions.

That doesn't mean I advocate all 18, 19, and 20 year olds should start carrying a concealed handgun just as all 21 and over shouldn't ... but those who feel up to the responsibility should not have that Constitutional Right infringed - because our society/government/laws holds them legally accountable for their actions in all other ways.

If a person is legally old enough to leave the support & protection of their father, brothers, and uncles; vote; marry; drive; operate a boat; enter into contracts; have an abortion; make medical decisions for themselves and their children; be issued a passport and travel the world; own a home and be responsible to defend it from intruders; go to adult prison or otherwise be held legally accountable for wrongdoing; be subject to civil lawsuit; be accountable for filing and paying all taxes required of them by the government; seek and engage in hazardous employment; operate heavy or dangerous machinery; and serve in the military to fight, kill people, and maybe die for Uncle Sam ... they're old enough to have their Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms protected by the government (as well as enjoy an alcoholic beverage, but that's another issue.)

It's time we started treating young adults like adults ... giving them all the rights that come with adulthood and full citizenship along with the responsibilities for which we already hold them legally accountable.

Firearms training classes are great. I am an advocate. But what other Constitutional Rights do we have to pay to take a government mandated "class" for & then pay a fee in order to freely exercise? If anything I recommend the public schools offer the class free of charge before the age of 18. Perhaps one class in middle school and a refresher in high school - just as they should educate our children in basic personal finance, civil contracts, civil and criminal law, and a lot of other civic duties & responsibilities. (A personal anecdote that is somewhat akin to this whole government-mandated-class thing has to do with motorcycle helmet laws in Texas. Now this is not a Constitutional Right, of course, and I don't normally ride without a helmet ... but when I moved to Texas I wanted to have that option on rare occasion. In order to have the option to ride without a helmet in Texas you have to have taken a Motorcycle Safety Course approved by Texas DOT - even if you already have an MC endorsement on your driver license. These courses are put on by private training schools and cost about $200! I took the course ... and I'll give the school credit, it was a decent course ... but I had been riding motorcycles already for 40 years and had an MC endorsed license already! The point of the anecdote though is it's just so much more busybody government nonsense cooked up by a bunch of busy-body State legislators supported by a bunch of busybody constituents ... most of whom likely don't even ride motorcycles.)

As to fingerprint checks ... what other Constitutional Right is it incumbent upon citizens to prove to the government they have never been convicted of a felony before they can exercise that right ... and to pay a fee to the government in order to prove themselves innocent? Would you support an annual fingerprint check (& fee) in order to establish to the government you are not a felon before you are allowed to exercise your Constitutional Right to vote? Felons already know they are legally barred from even possessing a firearm, much less carrying one concealed ... why would they even bother to submit a fingerprint check to carry a firearm, when they know it's going to come up positive. It's not like they will be deterred from carrying if they are or would be denied a permit if they are so inclined to carry. They are breaking the law either way.

btw - I'm fine with with applying restrictions on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms of those convicted of violent crimes or adjudged by a court to be mentally unstable/dangerous. But that restriction should be ordered by a Judge as part of their sentencing or commitment order after a hearing and in accordance with Due Process and should not always necessarily be a rigid lifetime statutory bar. It should depend on the individual circumstances of the crime & individual - and there should be an appeal process. I don't think it should be the case every person ever convicted of any and every crime that was potentially punishable by a year or more in jail (whether that's what they received or not ) should be permanently banned from hunting or defending their home & family with a firearm. But that's what Federal firearms law says:
Quote:
U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 44 › 922
18 U.S. Code 922 - Unlawful acts
...
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—
(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; ...
... to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
Finally ... plenty of 18 to 20 year old's (& younger) out there carrying & committing firearms offenses regardless of the age-related restrictions on concealed carry permits. The restriction is certainly not deterring them, it only restricts those inclined to be law-abiding to begin with.
bigbulls likes this.
__________________
*



If you need music on the beach, you're missing the point.


*

Last edited by AndyS; 08-01-2014 at 10:10 AM.
AndyS is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-31-2014, 01:33 PM   #65
Freshwater Flounder
White Marlin
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside9 View Post
"With the badge next to the gun"
As though that will deter a criminal intent upon assaulting you & trying to take your sidearm. (it will not - don't ask how I knowi)
__________________
*



If you need music on the beach, you're missing the point.


*
AndyS is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 07-31-2014, 02:53 PM   #66
Senior Member
Sailfish
 
bigbulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,635
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyS View Post
You don't have a 19 y/o daughter, I take it.

You would uphold the right of a 21 year old young woman to carry a firearm protect herself from a violent abduction/rape, carjacking, etc ... yet leave the 18, 19, or 20 year old relatively defenseless, as though they could never need to defend themselves from a violent crime.

I'm gonna speak up for young adults here for a minute. I'm 53 y/o, but I was a plenty decent shot at 18, responsible to boot - and there are plenty of responsible/mature 18 y/o's out there today and they can inadvertently find themselves in a bad situation, a bad part of town, and potential victims of violent crime as much as you or I. Your way of thinking leaves them relatively defenseless ... second class citizens in a way. Being responsible has little to do with age once one is beyond 18 ... I've known plenty of irresponsible/immature 40 year olds --- and some of them are packing ... and doubtful how emotionally stable some of them are; how well they understand the law; or how safely they can handle a firearm. Yet we somehow still manage to argue their Constitutional Rights not be infringed and hold them legally accountable for their actions.

That doesn't mean I advocate all 18, 19, and 20 year olds should start carrying a concealed handgun just as all 21 and over shouldn't ... but those who feel up to the responsibility should not have that Constitutional Right infringed - because our society/government/laws holds them legally accountable for their actions in all other ways.

If a person is legally old enough to leave the support & protection of their father & brothers; vote; marry; drive; operate a boat; enter into contracts; have an abortion; make medical decisions for themselves and their children; be issued a passport and travel the world; own a home and be responsible to defend it from intruders; go to adult prison or otherwise be held legally accountable for wrongdoing; be subject to civil lawsuit; be accountable for filing and paying all taxes required of them by the government; seek and engage in hazardous employment; operate heavy or dangerous machinery; and serve in the military to fight, kill people, and maybe die for Uncle Sam ... they're old enough to have their Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms protected by the government (as well as enjoy an alcoholic beverage, but that's another issue.)

It's time we started treating young adults like adults ... giving them all the rights that come with adulthood and full citizenship along with the responsibilities for which we already hold them legally accountable.

Firearms training classes are great. I am an advocate. But what other Constitutional Rights do we have to pay to take a government mandated "class" for & then pay a fee in order to freely exercise? If anything I recommend the public schools offer the class free of charge before the age of 18. Perhaps one class in middle school and a refresher in high school - just as they should educate our children in basic personal finance, civil contracts, civil and criminal law, and a lot of other civic duties & responsibilities. (A personal anecdote that is somewhat akin to this whole government-mandated-class thing has to do with motorcycle helmet laws in Texas. Now this is not a Constitutional Right, of course, and I don't normally ride without a helmet ... but when I moved to Texas I wanted to have that option on rare occasion. In order to have the option to ride without a helmet in Texas you have to have taken a Motorcycle Safety Course approved by Texas DOT - even if you already have an MC endorsement on your driver license. These courses are put on by private training schools and cost about $200! I took the course ... and I'll give the school credit, it was a decent course ... but I had been riding motorcycles already for 40 years and had an MC endorsed license already! The point of the anecdote though is it's just so much more busybody government nonsense cooked up by a bunch of busy-body State legislators supported by a bunch of busybody constituents ... most of whom likely don't even ride motorcycles.)

As to fingerprint checks ... what other Constitutional Right is it incumbent upon citizens to prove to the government they have never been convicted of a felony before they can exercise that right ... and to pay a fee to the government in order to prove themselves innocent? Would you support an annual fingerprint check (& fee) in order to establish to the government you are not a felon before you are allowed to exercise your Constitutional Right to vote? Felons already know they are legally barred from even possessing a firearm, much less carrying one concealed ... why would they even bother to submit a fingerprint check to carry a firearm, when they know it's going to come up positive. It's not like they will be deterred from carrying if they are or would be denied a permit if they are so inclined to carry. They are breaking the law either way.

btw - I'm fine with with applying restrictions on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms of those convicted of violent crimes or adjudged by a court to be mentally unstable/dangerous. But that restriction should be ordered by a Judge as part of their sentencing or commitment order after a hearing and in accordance with Due Process and should not always necessarily be a rigid lifetime statutory bar. It should depend on the individual circumstances of the crime & individual - and there should be an appeal process. I don't think it should be the case every person ever convicted of any and every crime that was potentially punishable by a year or more in jail (whether that's what they received or not ) should be permanently banned from hunting or defending their home & family with a firearm. But that's what Federal firearms law says:


Finally ... plenty of 18 to 20 year old's out there carrying & committing firearms offenses regardless of the age-related restrictions on concealed carry permits. The restriction is certainly not deterring them, it only restricts those inclined to be law-abiding to begin with.
__________________
Washington is playing their ignorant and ill-informed constituency like an organ grinder plays his monkey. The monkey shuts up and does what he's told, as long as he gets his banana. There is no difference in Washington. They squander the blood sweat and tears of the hard working, tax paying Americans and lie to them when they're caught. Needing their ever-increasing supply of bananas, the trained monkeys will continue to dance for their bananas.
bigbulls is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 08-01-2014, 03:59 AM   #67
LyterKillsLing
Grouper
 
FreeDiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Gulf Breeze
Posts: 718
Default

This subject could literally go back and forth till I'm dead. Hopefully thats plenty more years from now. I'll continue my training and concealment, you have my vote if you'd like to feel like John Wayne.

Enjoy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
I <3 THE POON!
FreeDiver is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 08-01-2014, 09:22 PM   #68
Senior Member
White Marlin
 
Breeze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pensacola
Posts: 3,334
Default

I actually asked one of my LEO customers about this. He said he, and his LEO buddies are all for it. Said his opinion is that it will definately help cut crime.
__________________
"America is not at war. The U.S. Military is at war. America is at the Mall.
If you don't stand behind our troops, PLEASE feel free to stand in front of them!"Call
Breeze is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 08-02-2014, 02:28 PM   #69
Senior Member
Trigger
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 210
Default

Look if your old enough (17 with parental consent) to die for your country by joining any branch of the service then you should be able to enjoy all the rights and privileges that everyone 21 and up does! I've fought along side plenty of 17 year old young men and women that I trust with a gun more than some adults much older. And have had said age group save my butt on more than one occasion as well. So while not everyone should be able to carry a gun but at the sometime a persons age sometimes isn't the best gage to judge a person by. IMHO. And I could go on and on about practice and going to the range and what not but that is a topic for another day. But I will say that going to the range and being proficient with your weapon is a must if you decide to carry it, that way you are at least giving yourself a little better fighting chance of surviving a firefight just due to muscle memory alone heaven forbid you actually have to draw your weapon to protect yourself and/or your family. Just saying shooting paper and a real firefight are too entirely different things!
John B. likes this.
bass186 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 08-22-2014, 10:28 PM   #70
Senior Member
Snapper
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 496
Default

Found this chart today... for your information
Attached Thumbnails
Open carry in Florida-open-jpg  
__________________
Retired SMC USN
RonA is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Pensacola Fishing Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
How Did You Find Us?
Tell us how you heard about Pensacola Fishing Forum.

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.