Florida attempts to pass open carry.........

[KennyFSU]

I do not agree with open carry either BUT the more 2A restrictions that are lifted the better. It's a move toward the right direction.

[JimPage]

Seems to me that open carry should be legal as well as concealed. I don't encourage open carry because it alarms some people and for tactical reasons in general, but there are certainly many occassions when open carry is appropriate. It certainly should be an option.

[KChen986]

I agree with Tyme--I'd hate to get charged with brandishing or whatnot if my shirt inadvertently lifts up and exposes my rig.

If this passes, I could probably wear OWB (concealed) without fear of legal exposure.

[Vince44]

As I wouldn't open carry myself, I think this would be a step in the right direction for any state towards concealed carry for all. I live in Maryland right now and to get a concealed carry permit here is next to impossible. I would definitely carry concealed if I were to get a permit, but I think I'd have to move to another state for that to happen.

[Don P]

Legal open carry prevents nuisance charges from being brought against those carrying concealed if they accidentally print, or uncover their firearms. Or, as you mentioned, sometimes expedience prevents quick, easy, and safe concealment.

Absolutely correct being that the Florida statutes on this very topic are extremely vague. As this lawyer has stated in his book www.floridafirearmslaw.com there is NO case law to reference on this matter.

[GoOfY-FoOt]

It is a tool. It is a right.

If hammers were vilified by the media and our wise legislators determined them detrimental to society, every time someone saw a carpenter, they would become "alarmed".

The public just needs to be re-acclimated to the visible presence of the guns that have always been there. I don't believe the old adage, "out of sight, out of mind," applies here. Our rights should be on people's mind and we as a people, should discuss them, regularly.

Personally, I am required to wear a gun at work. Throughout the day, and both before and after my schedule, I usually make a stop or two at a restaurant or a convenience store, and it is quite the hassle to unarm, or cover up, just to grab a bite or get gas. Especially, when those places are usually a higher target for thieves and robbers.

I welcome the common sense legislation being put forth by this great State. It's about time that our leaders...lead.

Bill

[cbrgator]

Well said Goofy Foot.

[45Gunner]

Perhaps my wording was not the clearest; I fully understand the rights issue and support the second amendment with all my heart and soul. What I am eluding to is not the fact that open carry is or is not a right granted under the second amendment ,but, asking what advantage does open carry have for the average citizen such as you and I?

Granted, you have the right to carry concealed and thus should have the right to open carry. What I want to know is why one would prefer to open carry over conceal carry? There is no right or wrong answer...I am merely trying to understand your point of view if you support open carry, not as a right, but as a method or style of carry. As I said, I do not prefer and will probably not open carry even if it were legalized. That is my point of view and I hold it for many reasons personal to me. Educate me to your thoughts and preferences. Who knows, perhaps I will learn something and you will change my mind. Fire away......

I would ask that you avoid the obvious such as: I have to take the trash out and didn't want to cover up or take off my gun. Give me something substantial that will show me tactical advantage or some other solid reason that you feel open carry is well suited for the gun carrying membership.

[MLeake]

.... try this on for size:

If you were carrying your CCW, and a strong wind pushed your shirt back, you wouldn't have to worry about being charged with unlawful display, disturbing the peace, etc, if your CCW were momentarily uncovered. (Or if you bent over or did something that caused momentary printing, even though the weapon remained covered.)

As it currently stands in Florida, that could happen. It would be up to the discretion of the individual observing/responding officer, and the individual prosecutor.

If OC were legalized, the concern would be eliminated.

Of course, they could also revise Florida's CC laws to protect permit-holders against charges or loss of permit for instances of momentary, inadverdent display; but so far I don't believe they have done that.

[maestro pistolero]

Granted, you have the right to carry concealed and thus should have the right to open carry.

Actually, the opposite is more true. The SCOTUS in Heller highlighted that laws against concealed carry were typically upheld where open carry was historically protected.

I believe the CCW case law history evolved from older societal customs which dictated that hiding one's gun was underhanded, sneaky and somewhat dishonorable.

Today, because it's much less common, open carry of a pistol is seen more as rude, or worse, threatening. Since 37 states (or whatever the number is presently) have enacted shall-issue CCW licensing, the 'norm' is now to conceal.

But if open carry is not allowed, there emerges a variety of potential pitfalls to the CCW-only regimen. Some have already been mentioned such as inadvertent exposure of the weapon.

Other problems may include a sudden need to carry a weapon when no suitable clothing is at hand to sufficiently conceal the gun. It is possible to imagine any number of plausible circumstances and reasons why open carry can not, and should not be prohibited, starting with the fact that it is historically, and presently, IMO, a fundamental right.

[GoOfY-FoOt]

Of course, they could also revise Florida's CC laws to protect permit-holders against charges or loss of permit for instances of momentary, inadverdent display; but so far I don't believe they have done that.

That is exactly what they are trying to do, with a last minute floor amendment.

If you have been keeping track of SB 234, you’ll remember that Senator Ellyn Bogdanoff (R-Fort Lauderdale) introduced an amendment to the Senate Judiciary Committee that would have stripped out the open carry provision of the bill in favor of subjective language that would exempt inadvertent exposure of one’s firearm as punishable under law. Realizing she didn’t have the votes necessary to get the amendment adopted, Sen. Bogdanoff withdrew the amendment.


She has again introduced the exact same language as a floor amendment. The amendment only addresses inadvertent exposure, and does nothing to improve other situations in which general open carry is the only solution. For example, the amendment would not legalize open carry when hiking, when entering or exiting a vehicle, when on any private property other than one’s own residence or place of business. Most troubling is the fact that the determination of what is “inadvertent” would remain in the hands of law enforcement.

The Florida Sheriffs Association is walking the halls of the Florida Senate, lobbying heavily against the bill (SB 234), saying that they cannot find any prosecutions on the books concerning accidental exposure. This is a small consolation to those who have been detained for hours, disarmed, handcuffed, proned out, held at gunpoint, and booked, only to be released when the State Attorney or District Attorney found no crime with which to pursue prosecution. In fact, just last week, an individual was “printing” in a Hillsborough county restaurant and a patron called in a “suspicious person” call. The individual was pulled over by four HCSO cruisers after leaving the restaurant, and was removed from the vehicle, disarmed, handcuffed, and detained while sitting on the curb AFTER PROVIDING HIS CWFL for over a half-hour. During this time, he was subjected to leading questions like, “What war are you preparing for?” and “Why do you feel you need to carry a firearm?” He was told that the only reason he was being released rather than transported was because the caller incorrectly stated the firearm bulge was on his right side, and his firearm was on his left side.

This is exactly the type of situation open carry would eliminate. Imagine what would have happened had he had his children with him in the vehicle at the time?

PLEASE... If you live in Florida, contact your Senators NOW, and ask them to reject the floor amendment, and weigh the bill in it's existing form, and on it's merits...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the reasons I would prefer the ability to OC:

The number one reason is speed. In a critical life or death situation, milliseconds MATTER. And I can draw from my Blackhawk SERPA holster, faster, than I can with my IWB. And if my shirt was tucked in, forget it. I'm wrestling with my clothing while I could be saving a life, which might be my own...

As I stated above, it is also a convenience issue.

Third, I am of the mindset, that CC is somewhat dishonest, to a point. I feel that by hiding the fact that I am carrying, somehow I am not being truthful to my fellow man. I don't know. It's just me. There are many situations that I would CC, but around my neck of the woods, it just doesn't feel right.

There are more reasons that I have, but they elude me at the moment...

[45Gunner]

You guys have all made good points and I thank you for your input. However, I have difficulty believing that if a respectable looking person legally carrying a concealed gun should accidently "print" or have a shirt momentarily blow up exposing his gun, that the world would turn upside down, the cavalry would be brought in and a massive legal battle would ensue with the local District Attorney.

The key words in the previous paragraph are "respectable looking person." I am sure if a CCW Permit holder dressed with his shorts around his knees, three gold front teeth, nose pierced, and a skull and crossbones tattooed on his bare shoulder should accidentally display a gun, I would certainly understand that a concerned citizen may call in the local calvary. And that arriving calvary would certainly have a lot of questions to ask. Profiling? Probably. What do you think?

In my case, I am tall, not too overweight, have a neat haircut with a head of gray hair, a neatly trimmed mustache, and always careful about my appearance, even if I am wearing jeans or a pair of cargo shorts. In other words, I am "professional looking." If I should get out of my car and my shirt tail should innocently blow up momentarily displaying my OWB holster and gun, I seriously doubt that I would find myself before a jury of my peers. And let's take it one step further...lets say that the person that did spy my gun was a LEO. I'm 99% positive that he would approach and ask if I had a permit for the concealed weapon. He may even go as far as to ask for that permit and perhaps make a radio call to see if there were any outstanding warrants for me. After he was satisfied that I was legitimate, he would most likely advise me to be more careful and wish me a good day.

[aarondhgraham]

Unless that were the only way I could go armed in public.

I feel that having a pistol in plain sight,,,
Would make me a ripe target.

Besides, I don't like being stared at or even noticed for that matter,,,
I prefer to wend my way through life being invisible,,,
A gun on your hip guarantees you will be noticed.

I have no scientific data on this,,,
Just my not-so-humble opinion on the mater.

Aarond

[MLeake]

aarondgraham, the question isn't whether you would choose to do it.

The question is whether the government should be able to tell you not to do it.

For most of us, that answer is a resounding NO.

[cbrgator]

I do not plan on OCing either. But I should have the right to do so...

[Don P]

Of course, they could also revise Florida's CC laws to protect permit-holders against charges or loss of permit for instances of momentary, inadverdent display; but so far I don't believe they have done that.

Correct as I stated earlier there is NO CASE LAW with regards to this matter and honestly I don't want to be the first test case per say. Could have a ugly result.

The key words in the previous paragraph are "respectable looking person."

That would be profiling for the positive instead of the negative would it not.
Gang banger or someone projecting that kind of image could very well be carrying legally, yes/no? So the fuzz should screw with the banger and let MR. John Q. clean cut citizen slide??????????

[cbrgator]

Open Carry is gone. They just amended the bill to decriminalize inadvertent exposure.

Full open carry is still a crime. They gutted the whole bill. We lose. Game over.

[cbrgator]

Sen. Bogdanoff's amendment was just adopted. Her amendment got rid of open carry but instead decriminalizes inadvertent exposure.

Open Carry in Florida is dead as we know it.

[Don P]

This from the FLA web site for the senate.

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill...=&SearchQuery=

S 234 Firearms Evers 4/27/2011 S Placed on 3rd reading

I am unable to find anywhere that the bill has been gutted.
Links would be nice for confirming what has been done to the bill

[Don P]

Links for the masses to view.
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill...ent/322294/PDF
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill...ent/688734/PDF

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/234

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill...11s0234.rc.PDF

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill...nt/688734/HTML
It appears to be true. Lets see what happens on the 3rd reading

[GoOfY-FoOt]

The latest wording is even more vague than Bogdanoff's last amendment.

Who can read legalese? What does, "A bill to be entitled
An act relating to firearms; amending s. 790.053, F.S.; providing that a person who is licensed to carry a concealed firearm is not in violation of law if the firearm is briefly and openly displayed under certain circumstances;...mean?

I guess you can open carry. But only for a minute at a time. And, only under "certain circumstances"...

And who determines if the display is more than brief, or, not open enough?

[cbrgator]

The bill is for brief inadvertent exposure i.e. your shirt flaps in the wind and exposes the gun.

[GoOfY-FoOt]

cbr, that is what the original floor amendment to the second committee substitute, stated. (accidentally or inadvertently display the firearm to the
ordinary sight of another person) But, the latest wording is what I posted at the bottom of page one.
(briefly and openly displayed under certain circumstances) (latest version)

Is this better, or just a different way to say the same thing?

[flcjinflorida]

I know I won't be carrying openly even if this does pass. I am just glad that they are passing another bill that will further our rights concerning guns.

I will probably carry openly in the first few weeks just to get local law enforcement used to it, but I'm a deputy sheriff anyway, so I don't think I will get into too much of a scruff up with the sheriff anyway.

[cbrgator]

Sorry....
They gutted open carry.

Now the bill will just protect against inadvertent exposure.

Open carry is dead.