Hello--Moving to Kissimmee from NC

[edrolee]

hi,

i'm Ed and by the 1st week of June i'll be living in/around Kissimmee

we're moving from Eastern North Carolina (greenville home of The East Carolina University Pirates)

as i understand it OC is Taboo in FL?

is there restrictions on how you can carry on your private property? (for ex. in NC you can carry concealed on your property without a permit although to carry concealed off property you are required to have a permit)


thank in advance for all the help

[Xulld]

hi,

i'm Ed and by the 1st week of June i'll be living in/around Kissimmee

we're moving from Eastern North Carolina (greenville home of The East Carolina University Pirates)

as i understand it OC is Taboo in FL?

is there restrictions on how you can carry on your private property? (for ex. in NC you can carry concealed on your property without a permit although to carry concealed off property you are required to have a permit)


thank in advance for all the help

Yea I miss NC OC.

Florida is about the opposite of NC. Where in NC in your vehicle you need to keep it someplace visible, its the opposite in Florida. In FL it needs to be in a container with a latch. A holster with a snap counts, but you cannot wear the holster. A center console with a latch works, Glove box ect.

As far as on your property you can carry concealed (to my knowledge, IANAL)


In Florida you can only open carry on a hunting, camping or fishing trip, or going from or to that trip. The law is somewhat vague on details.

[77zach]

If you don't have a permit, you have to keep the gun in the glovebox or in a container with a lid. If you do have a permit you can carry concealed in your car or most other places besides schools and bars. NC has more off limits places (victim disarmament zones) than Fl. The Fl Dp of Ag div of licensing website incorrectly states you may not carry in places that serve alcohol. See 790 of the Fl law for all laws infringing on your rights.

[Rich7553]

Yea I miss NC OC.

Florida is about the opposite of NC. Where in NC in your vehicle you need to keep it someplace visible, its the opposite in Florida. In FL it needs to be in a container with a latch. A holster with a snap counts, but you cannot wear the holster. A center console with a latch works, Glove box ect.

As far as on your property you can carry concealed (to my knowledge, IANAL)


In Florida you can only open carry on a hunting, camping or fishing trip, or going from or to that trip. The law is somewhat vague on details.

Nope, the container doesn't have to have a latch. It must have a closed lid, so even a shoebox with a lid is legal.

790.25(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."

790.001(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."

Nothing about a latch here.

[Rich7553]

hi,

i'm Ed and by the 1st week of June i'll be living in/around Kissimmee

we're moving from Eastern North Carolina (greenville home of The East Carolina University Pirates)

as i understand it OC is Taboo in FL?

is there restrictions on how you can carry on your private property? (for ex. in NC you can carry concealed on your property without a permit although to carry concealed off property you are required to have a permit)


thank in advance for all the help

Greetings Ed, and welcome to Florida, AKA "heaven's waiting room".

You can find all of the Florida Statutes regarding firearms here:

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/...EChapter%20790

In general, open carry is forbidden. That prohibition can be found in 790.053 Florida Statutes. There is an exception for brief exposure of an otherwise concealed firearm so long as the exposure is not done in a rude or threatening manner, not in necessary self defense.

Additionally, the other exceptions can be found in 790.25 (3) Florida Statutes. Some of them include:

• At your home or place of business
• While camping, hunting, fishing, and going to or coming from such an expedition
• At a shooting range, and going to or coming from the range

Note that the "going to and coming from" clause refers to direct travel, not stops for gas or food and the like. Also, case law has established that one does not require a license to carry concealed on one's own home or property, or at one's place of business. However in apartment or condo complexes, that does not include common use areas.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. Should you have further legal questions, please contact Florida Carry at the link in my signature line, and we will put you in touch with one of our legal staff, who are licensed attorney specializing in firearms law. And please consider joining Florida Carry.

[Ironside]

[QUOTE=
Additionally, the other exceptions can be found in 790.25 (3) Florida Statutes. Some of them include:

[LIST][*]At your home or place of business[*]While camping, hunting, fishing, and going to or coming from such an expedition[*]At a shooting range, and going to or coming from the range[*][/LIST]

Note that the "going to and coming from" clause refers to direct travel, not stops for gas or food and the like. QUOTE]

Rich,

I have been mulling this over for some time and would ask for a cite for the inference that direct is somehow included. The word direct does not appear in the statute. Further, I would argue that an expedition is a journey that would require the means to continue such as fuel, food and supplies requiring some stops to replenish.

If I am going to the range I have no hesitation stopping at the 7-11 to pick up a sandwich for lunch. When going hunting lunch at the local BBQ is an option. On the way to fishing a fuel stop is needed. (How about it AD?)

Tell us where the word "direct" comes into play?

790.25.3
(h) A person engaged in fishing, camping, or lawful hunting or going to or returning from a fishing,camping, or lawful hunting expedition;

merriam-webster:Expedition-1. a: a journey or excursion undertaken for a specific purpose

2.journey:traveling from one place to another, usually taking a rather long time; trip

Also, under the Maps section of OCDO the Florida statute is misquoted as saying direct.

Can you shed some light on this?

[JeepSeller]

[QUOTE=Ironside;1747455]

[*]At your home or place of business[*]While camping, hunting, fishing, and going to or coming from such an expedition[*]At a shooting range, and going to or coming from the range[*][/LIST]

Note that the "going to and coming from" clause refers to direct travel, not stops for gas or food and the like. QUOTE]

Rich,

I have been mulling this over for some time and would ask for a cite for the inference that direct is somehow included. The word direct does not appear in the statute. Further, I would argue that an expedition is a journey that would require the means to continue such as fuel, food and supplies requiring some stops to replenish.

If I am going to the range I have no hesitation stopping at the 7-11 to pick up a sandwich for lunch. When going hunting lunch at the local BBQ is an option. On the way to fishing a fuel stop is needed. (How about it AD?)

Tell us where the word "direct" comes into play?

790.25.3
(h) A person engaged in fishing, camping, or lawful hunting or going to or returning from a fishing,camping, or lawful hunting expedition;

merriam-webster:Expedition-1. a: a journey or excursion undertaken for a specific purpose

2.journey:traveling from one place to another, usually taking a rather long time; trip

Also, under the Maps section of OCDO the Florida statute is misquoted as saying direct.

Can you shed some light on this?

You might get away with the gas stop argument. But, in my opinion, I think you'd have an uphill battle on your hands trying to argue that your stop at the BBQ Hut, and a stop at WalMart, then a stop at Publix, then a stop to see your Aunt Martha would all be part of your returning home from a fishing expedition.

I think we need to be careful here in how we define this stuff. Push too far and something's gonna break. Personally, I'm not willing to risk my freedom on a very thin stretching of the definition of a word.

You don't have to be going to or coming from home. But, I suggest keeping it simple, go directly between one point to another. Then go back to concealed carry to stay safe.

Finally, to the OP, bear in mind that OC is an almost non-existent practice in Florida. Even though it's perfectly legal to OC certain places, it's not common enough to avoid the negative attention you may attract by doing so. If you do OC, do so fully prepared to deal with the consequences. I know that bunches up a lot of panties around here, but, I believe we'd be failing you if we didn't let you know the whole truth, not just the truth that we like to hear ourselves talk about.

[edrolee]

no OC will be the toughest part of the move for me i think

here in NC OC is legal (with certain places on the no go list or posted with signs) without any kind of gov't issued permit and i never have gotten around to getting my concealed carry permit (concealed handgun permit here in NC b/c only handguns are covered w/ the permit) in part b/c of the money involved ($180-$270 depending on your county and where you take the class) and in part b/c it's one more gov't intrusion

i don't OC a lot here but if i'm going to be out past 9pm or on the rare occasion that the wife wakes me up at 3am b/c she or our son is sick and needs something from the grocery/pharmacy it is nice to be able to just put on my paddle holster and go

are there any issues w/ imprinting in FL (i ask b/c i carry a full sized 1911) i do have a desantis mad max that can actually pretty well conceal my 1911 even allowing my shirt to be tucked in w/o much notice-ability


thanks again

[ADulay]

If I am going to the range I have no hesitation stopping at the 7-11 to pick up a sandwich for lunch. When going hunting lunch at the local BBQ is an option. On the way to fishing a fuel stop is needed. (How about it AD?)

Well, I'm thinking making several stops along the way would really be stretching it.

I have, on a few return trips from the range, stopped at the local Wal-Mart gas pumps and filled up the bike. Obviously nothing happened and not too many people would see me anyway at the outer pumps.

Although I do this on a daily basis, I think I'd have a problem with walking into the Wal-Mart because I needed some fishing line while open carrying.

Could I pull it off? Probably. I'd also probably be talking with a sheriff's deputy somewhere between the fishing department and my parked motorcycle.

The bottom line for me? I'll stick to the occasional stop for fuel while OC, coming back from the range or the fishing spot.

AD (over a full year of daily OC on the motorcycle as we type)

[Ironside]

[QUOTE/]
I think we need to be careful here in how we define this stuff. Push too far and something's gonna break. Personally, I'm not willing to risk my freedom on a very thin stretching of the definition of a word.

[/QUOTE]

Well, what I am looking for is a cite for a non-word directly. Where did that come from?

And WTH do lawyers do anyway, nit-pit away at singular words to arrive at a legal conclusion. Directly is not in the statute. Expedition is, so we need that definition.

Who knows, maybe that word is awaiting a test case just like briefly.

I would still like Rich to satisfy the questions in my previous post, how about it Rich?

A. Dulay, are you on a fishing expedition when you stop for gas? Are you going somewhere or are you going directly somewhere? Help me out here ...

[Xulld]

Nope, the container doesn't have to have a latch. It must have a closed lid, so even a shoebox with a lid is legal.

790.25(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."

790.001(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."

Nothing about a latch here.

Ahh, thanks for the details! Its easy to forget. I remembered the snapped in a holster part, and that was probably the bit that made me think "latch" was an element.

If you do OC, do so fully prepared to deal with the consequences. I know that bunches up a lot of panties around here, but, I believe we'd be failing you if we didn't let you know the whole truth, not just the truth that we like to hear ourselves talk about.

Well said, and good advice.

[Rich7553]

[QUOTE/]
I think we need to be careful here in how we define this stuff. Push too far and something's gonna break. Personally, I'm not willing to risk my freedom on a very thin stretching of the definition of a word.

Well, what I am looking for is a cite for a non-word directly. Where did that come from?

And WTH do lawyers do anyway, nit-pit away at singular words to arrive at a legal conclusion. Directly is not in the statute. Expedition is, so we need that definition.

Who knows, maybe that word is awaiting a test case just like briefly.

I would still like Rich to satisfy the questions in my previous post, how about it Rich?

A. Dulay, are you on a fishing expedition when you stop for gas? Are you going somewhere or are you going directly somewhere? Help me out here ...[/QUOTE]


David,

To my knowledge, there is no case law on point. What this means is that the question hasn't reached an appellate level Florida court or higher. So what I'm saying is pure speculation on my part, tempered by conversations I've had with firearms lawyers.

You are correct, the statute does not say "direct". However it does say, "going to and coming from". So the question in court would be, at what point are you going to or coming from a fishing expedition? If you leave your home with a fishing tackle box and a pole, but you know you have to stop for gas on the way, are you going fishing or are you going to the gas station at that point in your journey? If you leave the fishing hole with full knowledge and intent of stopping by the Waffle House on the way home to grab a bite to eat, when you leave the restaurant, are you coming from fishing or coming from eating?

Also consider the reason the legislature included the "going to and coming from" phrase. If the statute simply said, "while fishing, camping, or hunting", is it then possible that you could be charged with open carry the moment you reeled in your line and began to walk back to your car, or perhaps when you broke camp and were packing your tent? Or maybe when you were dragging your deer out of the woods?

So does the statute say directly? No, it doesn't. But likely the people hearing the case in court wouldn't be "gun people" and they're going to frame the issue in the perspective of - does it make any sense to open carry a firearm pretty much anywhere under the guise of the "going to or coming from" clause. And I'm afraid the answer to that is no. The general consensus among the legal eagles is that the "directly" part is implied, would be expected by a judge, and therefore an argument in court on the basis of the lack of the term "direct" would likely fail. So as many have said, it may be technically legal, it may not be prudent to the judge.

But ultimately, it is fruitless to waste time and effort over minutia in statute when our goal is to get general open carry, or preferably constitutional carry in Florida. Florida Carry will be introducing legislation in the upcoming session and future sessions until we get these initiatives passed.

[Ironside]

Well, what I am looking for is a cite for a non-word directly. Where did that come from?

And WTH do lawyers do anyway, nit-pit away at singular words to arrive at a legal conclusion. Directly is not in the statute. Expedition is, so we need that definition.

Who knows, maybe that word is awaiting a test case just like briefly.

I would still like Rich to satisfy the questions in my previous post, how about it Rich?

A. Dulay, are you on a fishing expedition when you stop for gas? Are you going somewhere or are you going directly somewhere? Help me out here ...

David,

To my knowledge, there is no case law on point. What this means is that the question hasn't reached an appellate level Florida court or higher. So what I'm saying is pure speculation on my part, tempered by conversations I've had with firearms lawyers.

You are correct, the statute does not say "direct". However it does say, "going to and coming from". So the question in court would be, at what point are you going to or coming from a fishing expedition? If you leave your home with a fishing tackle box and a pole, but you know you have to stop for gas on the way, are you going fishing or are you going to the gas station at that point in your journey? If you leave the fishing hole with full knowledge and intent of stopping by the Waffle House on the way home to grab a bite to eat, when you leave the restaurant, are you coming from fishing or coming from eating?

Also consider the reason the legislature included the "going to and coming from" phrase. If the statute simply said, "while fishing, camping, or hunting", is it then possible that you could be charged with open carry the moment you reeled in your line and began to walk back to your car, or perhaps when you broke camp and were packing your tent? Or maybe when you were dragging your deer out of the woods?

So does the statute say directly? No, it doesn't. But likely the people hearing the case in court wouldn't be "gun people" and they're going to frame the issue in the perspective of - does it make any sense to open carry a firearm pretty much anywhere under the guise of the "going to or coming from" clause. And I'm afraid the answer to that is no. The general consensus among the legal eagles is that the "directly" part is implied, would be expected by a judge, and therefore an argument in court on the basis of the lack of the term "direct" would likely fail. So as many have said, it may be technically legal, it may not be prudent to the judge.

But ultimately, it is fruitless to waste time and effort over minutia in statute when our goal is to get general open carry, or preferably constitutional carry in Florida. Florida Carry will be introducing legislation in the upcoming session and future sessions until we get these initiatives passed.[/QUOTE]

Rich,

This may surprise you but we agree in principle and I understand your arguement about a judge's opinion but what about a jury? Many a case has been won a technicality. I think that alot hinges on the word expedition and it's connotation of resupply of material items only available if one stops to replenish.

But as you said there is no case law so it remains to be tested. My goals are the same as yours.

If there is to be no further discussion on this I will let it go ...

[Rich7553]

Rich,

This may surprise you but we agree in principle and I understand your arguement about a judge's opinion but what about a jury? Many a case has been won a technicality. I think that alot hinges on the word expedition and it's connotation of resupply of material items only available if one stops to replenish.

But as you said there is no case law so it remains to be tested. My goals are the same as yours.

If there is to be no further discussion on this I will let it go ...

It has been said that when one challenges the law, one should seek a trial by judge. However when one challenges a charge, one should seek a jury trial. As I understand it, this is because a jury has no authority to change a law, but a judge does. So if one were prosecuted under the "going to/coming from" issue, it would depend on the ultimate goal as to whether or not a judge or jury trial were preferred.

Nonetheless, it was a good question David. Unfortunately I didn't have a good answer for you. I guess that's a good thing in a way, because it means that few if any people have been arrested for it.

[77zach]

It has been said that when one challenges the law, one should seek a trial by judge. However when one challenges a charge, one should seek a jury trial. As I understand it, this is because a jury has no authority to change a law, but a judge does. So if one were prosecuted under the "going to/coming from" issue, it would depend on the ultimate goal as to whether or not a judge or jury trial were preferred.

Nonetheless, it was a good question David. Unfortunately I didn't have a good answer for you. I guess that's a good thing in a way, because it means that few if any people have been arrested for it.

The original purpose of the jury was to judge the law. It used to be its job to judge the facts AND the law. No more. I still subscribe to reports from fijaa:http://fija.org/category/jury-nullification/

It is still done today from time to time, but the laws still stand. There was a case in NY a few years ago where a jury refused to convict a white collar felon of possessing a gun. My dad was on jury that refused to convict a guy on a bicycle of DUI.

[georg jetson]

Nope, the container doesn't have to have a latch. It must have a closed lid, so even a shoebox with a lid is legal.

790.25(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."

790.001(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."

Nothing about a latch here.

Is "private conveyance" defined anywhere. I didn't find it in 790.001. Would a personal water craft with a glove compartment fall into this description?

[Rich7553]

Is "private conveyance" defined anywhere. I didn't find it in 790.001. Would a personal water craft with a glove compartment fall into this description?

I don't see why not. I couldn't find a statutory definition for "private conveyance" and the courts, when a legal definition is absent, rely on the dictionary definition.

From Merriam-Webster online:

1 : the action of conveying
2 : a means or way of conveying: as
a : an instrument by which title to property is conveyed
b : a means of transport : vehicle

I think we can agree on what "private" is, so I'd have to say a personal watercraft would meet the definition.

[edrolee]

well, it's official now just signed a lease on a house in davenport moving in on the 1st or 2nd of june

[MedWheeler]

Edrolee, welcome to the Gunshine State. Others have filled you in on the motor vehicle carry laws and requirements. As an aside to those, nothing in the law prohibits the carrying of a long gun anywhere in a motor vehicle. Just something to consider; I don't know what NC's laws are regarding those. They can be openly displayed or concealed, but they must not be "concealed on the person or otherwise readily accessible." So, gun racks and the like are okay, as is behind the seat of your pickup (you do have a pickup, don't you!?) However, reach behind the seat while it's there, and you could face charges of carrying a concealed firearm if you don't have a license to do so, as the gun becomes "readily accessible" while still concealed.
Another thing about the carry license. While many states restrict the licensee to a firearm only, and a handgun at that (and only one at a time), Florida's carry license is a "concealed weapon or firearm license." It does not restrict you from any type of weapon (except those prohibited in entirety by the state, such as switchblades and ballistic knives) or firearm. Figure out a way to conceal both your AR and your 1911 on you, and you're good to go.
Oh, and you asked about printing. There is no prohibition on that. Most people will not notice. Here in Florida those who do might assume the bulge to be a colostomy bag. The law, as pointed out, does not prohibit the "brief open display" of a normally-concealed firearm as long as it is not in a "rude or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense." The definition of "brief" has not yet been tested.