Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Thread: OC in Florida while at work

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale
    Posts
    2

    OC in Florida while at work

    I am trying to get some clarification or details on permitted open carry while at work. I am a real estate broker and always carry a concealed weapon while going to look at foreclosure units (lets just say people aren't too happy to get kicked out of their homes and always take it out on the listing agents).

    Does being allowed to open carry while at work limit me to the confines of my office, or does it extend to the viewing / showing of real estate properties?

    Typically I dislike open carry in general as I am a believer in the element of surprise and feel that an exposed weapon can quickly escalate a situation, however in certain situation I feel that open carry would allow me to safely get my job done.

  2. #2
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    Contact a attorney. The Florida sub-forum may have a few folks who could answer your question or direct you towards someone who can.

    Asking a Interwebs forum could be hazardous, legally speaking.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by MistaBond View Post
    I am trying to get some clarification or details on permitted open carry while at work. I am a real estate broker and always carry a concealed weapon while going to look at foreclosure units (lets just say people aren't too happy to get kicked out of their homes and always take it out on the listing agents).

    Does being allowed to open carry while at work limit me to the confines of my office, or does it extend to the viewing / showing of real estate properties?

    Typically I dislike open carry in general as I am a believer in the element of surprise and feel that an exposed weapon can quickly escalate a situation, however in certain situation I feel that open carry would allow me to safely get my job done.
    Not legal - Those properties are not your "Place of business"

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Fort Lauderdale
    Posts
    2
    thanks,

    What about just my physical office. Typically I carry concealed if using a belt holster, however when wearing a suit and shoulder holster I am ok to take off my suit jacket while inside my own office without having to worry about possibly police repercussions?

  5. #5
    Regular Member 2OLD2W8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Black Waters
    Posts
    151
    Are you the sole proprietor/COO of the brokerage firm or are you an employee?
    “We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

    "free people ought...to be armed." In so doing we grasp the larger lesson that the ability to defend ourselves is part and parcel to our freedom. George Washington , January 7, 1790

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by MistaBond View Post
    thanks,

    What about just my physical office. Typically I carry concealed if using a belt holster, however when wearing a suit and shoulder holster I am ok to take off my suit jacket while inside my own office without having to worry about possibly police repercussions?
    You may lawfully open carry (or carry concealed without a CWFL) while at your place of business, so yes it would be lawful.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by 2OLD2W8 View Post
    Are you the sole proprietor/COO of the brokerage firm or are you an employee?
    Not relevant to the legalities involved.

  8. #8
    Regular Member 2OLD2W8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Black Waters
    Posts
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    Not relevant to the legalities involved.
    The relevance of my post was a response to OP's follow up question regarding open carry at his physical office..

    Business owners (sole proprietors,COO's) can legally open carry at their place of business..Employees can not unless the owner authorizes the activity.
    Last edited by 2OLD2W8; 11-14-2013 at 01:43 PM.
    “We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

    "free people ought...to be armed." In so doing we grasp the larger lesson that the ability to defend ourselves is part and parcel to our freedom. George Washington , January 7, 1790

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by 2OLD2W8 View Post
    The relevance of my post was a response to OP's follow up question regarding open carry at his physical office..

    Business owners (sole proprietors,COO's) can legally open carry at their place of business..Employees can not unless the owner authorizes the activity.
    Employees can not unless the owner authorizes the activity.
    You are incorrect, employees do not need permission to carry at their place of business.

    I direct your attention to State v. Commons, 592 So. 2d 317 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 3rd Dist. 1991
    Finally, the [State of Florida] claims that one is protected from criminal responsibility under these circumstances only if he obtains the permission of his employer to carry a concealed gun. There is no statutory authority for such a requirement and we have no power to create one ourselves.

  10. #10
    Regular Member 2OLD2W8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Black Waters
    Posts
    151
    In State v. Commons, 592 So. 2d 317 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 3rd Dist. 1991 they are referring to concealed carry, yes?

    The OP's questions pertain to open carry....
    “We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

    "free people ought...to be armed." In so doing we grasp the larger lesson that the ability to defend ourselves is part and parcel to our freedom. George Washington , January 7, 1790

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by 2OLD2W8 View Post
    In State v. Commons, 592 So. 2d 317 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 3rd Dist. 1991 they are referring to concealed carry, yes?

    The OP's questions pertain to open carry....
    You're missing the fact that the statute, 790.25(3), that legalizes concealed carry without a CWFL, is the same statute that legalizes open carry in those situations.

    The provisions of ss. 790.053 and 790.06 do not apply in the following instances, and, despite such sections, it is lawful for the following persons to own, possess, and lawfully use firearms and other weapons, ammunition, and supplies for lawful purposes:
    . . .

  12. #12
    Regular Member 2OLD2W8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Black Waters
    Posts
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    You're missing the fact that the statute, 790.25(3), that legalizes concealed carry without a CWFL, is the same statute that legalizes open carry in those situations.

    Are you referring to this part of the statute?

    (n) A person possessing arms at his or her home or place of business;
    Last edited by 2OLD2W8; 11-16-2013 at 08:26 AM.
    “We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

    "free people ought...to be armed." In so doing we grasp the larger lesson that the ability to defend ourselves is part and parcel to our freedom. George Washington , January 7, 1790

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by 2OLD2W8 View Post
    Are you referring to this part of the statute?

    (n) A person possessing arms at his or her home or place of business;
    Yes, those sub-sections identify the locations and situations where folks 18 and over may openly carry a firearm in spite of the general prohibition contained in 790.053 and also carry a concealed firearm without a CWFL regardless of the prohibition on carrying concealed firearms contained in 790.01 and the requirement to have a license as required in 790.06.

  14. #14
    Regular Member 2OLD2W8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Black Waters
    Posts
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    Yes, those sub-sections identify the locations and situations where folks 18 and over may openly carry a firearm in spite of the general prohibition contained in 790.053 and also carry a concealed firearm without a CWFL regardless of the prohibition on carrying concealed firearms contained in 790.01 and the requirement to have a license as required in 790.06.

    I may be wrong about my comprehension of sub-section "(n) A person possessing arms at his or her home or place of business;"

    My take??.......

    The "person" in sub-section (n) reads as...... "at his or her (possessive use of a pronoun) home or place of business"... Meaning: said person owns/possesses his or her place of business. It does not state place of employment.

    Granted, in some instances the "person" could also be an employee as well as an owner, but I can not in good conscience substitute the word employee for "person" or the word employment in lieu of "business" in sub-section (n).

    Do you comprehend sub-section (n)to mean.....
    An employee possessing arms at his or her home or place of employment;" or

    A person possessing arms at his or her home or place of employment;"



    So my conclusion based on my interpretation of the current wording in sub-section (n) is... Employees of a business are not authorized by law to open carry unless the business owner approves of said activity.... The only exception to this would be if, the employee is also the owner of said business.

    P.S.

    I will never be so presumptuous as to state that you are incorrect......
    Regards............
    “We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

    "free people ought...to be armed." In so doing we grasp the larger lesson that the ability to defend ourselves is part and parcel to our freedom. George Washington , January 7, 1790

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by 2OLD2W8 View Post
    I may be wrong about my comprehension of sub-section "(n) A person possessing arms at his or her home or place of business;"

    My take??.......

    The "person" in sub-section (n) reads as...... "at his or her (possessive use of a pronoun) home or place of business"... Meaning: said person owns/possesses his or her place of business. It does not state place of employment.

    Granted, in some instances the "person" could also be an employee as well as an owner, but I can not in good conscience substitute the word employee for "person" or the word employment in lieu of "business" in sub-section (n).

    Do you comprehend sub-section (n)to mean.....
    An employee possessing arms at his or her home or place of employment;" or

    A person possessing arms at his or her home or place of employment;"



    So my conclusion based on my interpretation of the current wording in sub-section (n) is... Employees of a business are not authorized by law to open carry unless the business owner approves of said activity.... The only exception to this would be if, the employee is also the owner of said business.

    P.S.

    I will never be so presumptuous as to state that you are incorrect......
    Regards............
    I may be wrong
    You are.

    This has been the case since 1973 as decided by the Florida Supreme Court in Peoples v. State

    It has been upheld since, in many other cases such as State v. Commons:
    The appellate court rejected the State's claim that subsection (3)(n) was confined to a place of business owned by the defendant himself or that the defendant was protected from criminal responsibility under the circumstances only if he had permission from his employer to carry a concealed firearm. The Third District noted that no such requirement existed in the statute and that the court lacked the authority to engraft such requirement onto the statute.
    Brook v. State:
    We agree with our sister court in Commons that the "place of business" language of subsection (3)(n) is simple and straight-forward. Courts must give statutory language its plain and ordinary meaning and cannot add words which were not placed there by the Legislature. When a statute is clear and unambiguous, courts will not look behind the statute's plain language for legislative intent or resort to rules of statutory construction to ascertain such intent. Alternatively, in considering criminal statutes, the rule of lenity contained in section 775.021(1), Florida Statutes, requires that any ambiguity or situation in which statutory language is susceptible to differing constructions must be resolved in favor of the person charged with an offense.

    We are bound by the clear wording of the statute. The defendant's conduct fell within the ambit of the exemption contained in subsection 790.25(3)(n) and accordingly, the motion to dismiss should have been granted. We reverse and remand for entry of an order of discharge.
    And in Collins v. State, Moses v. State and again as recently as this year in State v. Little.

    40 years of well established case law disagree with your interpretation.



    I will never be so presumptuous as to state that you are incorrect......
    That's probably wise as it is almost never the case.

  16. #16
    Regular Member 2OLD2W8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Black Waters
    Posts
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post

    That's probably wise as it is almost never the case.
    It must be really difficult for you to find head wear that fits.....

    Would you be so kind as to provide links for your cites.... Too many cases with the same names from different states...

    It's not that I don't trust you.....I don't trust anyone!
    “We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

    "free people ought...to be armed." In so doing we grasp the larger lesson that the ability to defend ourselves is part and parcel to our freedom. George Washington , January 7, 1790

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by 2OLD2W8 View Post
    It must be really difficult for you to find head wear that fits.....

    Would you be so kind as to provide links for your cites.... Too many cases with the same names from different states...

    It's not that I don't trust you.....I don't trust anyone!

    It must be really difficult for you to find head wear that fits
    Just speaking the truth. I don't normally offer opinions on topics unless I have done the research and can provide citations.

    Would you be so kind as to provide links for your cites.... Too many cases with the same names from different states...
    Well, we are discussing Florida law here so that might narrow your search down a little. But I'll help you out.

    Peoples v. State, 287 So. 2d 63 - Fla: Supreme Court 1973
    State v. Commons, 592 So. 2d 317 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 3rd Dist. 1991
    Brook v. State, 999 So. 2d 1093 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 5th Dist. 2009
    Collins v. State, 475 So. 2d 968 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 4th Dist. 1985
    Moses v. State, 413 So. 2d 845 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 3rd Dist. 1982
    State v. Little, Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 4th Dist. 2013

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    80620
    Posts
    9

    Hey everybody

    Im trying to understand this so here goes.

    If I own a gas station in Florida and hire a cashier then they are allowed to carry a gun to work
    on my property without my permission?

    Is that what I am understanding? Just curious.

    thank you

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    Quote Originally Posted by willow140 View Post
    Im trying to understand this so here goes.

    If I own a gas station in Florida and hire a cashier then they are allowed to carry a gun to work
    on my property without my permission?

    Is that what I am understanding? Just curious.

    thank you
    It would have to be concealed, so, how would you know? Permission or otherwise?

    To be more direct...

    The State's pseudo-permission slip to carry a hidden, ineffective gun for which it will still arrest and imprison said carrier with said pseudo-permission slip does not trump your right to tell anyone, even your employee, to GTFO of your property.

    "Here's your carry permit, we're going to arrest you anyway. Oh, BTW, get out of the Gas Staition, the owner is a communist practicing tax-and-gouge faux-capitalism."

    Does this even make sense anymore?
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  20. #20
    Regular Member 2OLD2W8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Black Waters
    Posts
    151
    [
    QUOTE=ixtow;2005194]It would have to be concealed, so, how would you know? Permission or otherwise?

    To be more direct...

    The State's pseudo-permission slip to carry a hidden, ineffective gun for which it will still arrest and imprison said carrier with said pseudo-permission slip does not trump your right to tell anyone, even your employee, to GTFO of your property.

    "Here's your carry permit, we're going to arrest you anyway. Oh, BTW, get out of the Gas Staition, the owner is a communist practicing tax-and-gouge faux-capitalism."

    Does this even make sense anymore?
    It would have to be concealed
    That's in line with my thoughts also....
    Last edited by 2OLD2W8; 11-17-2013 at 08:44 AM.
    “We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

    "free people ought...to be armed." In so doing we grasp the larger lesson that the ability to defend ourselves is part and parcel to our freedom. George Washington , January 7, 1790

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by willow140 View Post
    Im trying to understand this so here goes.

    If I own a gas station in Florida and hire a cashier then they are allowed to carry a gun to work
    on my property without my permission?

    Is that what I am understanding? Just curious.

    thank you
    Legally, yes.
    Openly or concealed, handgun or long gun. CWFL or not.
    Of course there is nothing from preventing you from firing them for doing so. Or telling them not to and firing them for ignoring your instructions.
    Last edited by notalawyer; 11-17-2013 at 10:37 AM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by 2OLD2W8 View Post

    It would have to be concealed
    That's in line with my thoughts also....
    Why do you refuse to accept the clear, unambiguous language contained in 790.25(3) and over 40 years of case law that states otherwise?

    The provisions of ss. 790.053 and 790.06 do not apply in the following instances, and, despite such sections, it is lawful for the following persons to own, possess, and lawfully use firearms and other weapons, ammunition, and supplies for lawful purposes:
    790.053 is the statute making open carry unlawful.

    790.06 is the statute requiring a license to carry a concealed firearm.
    Last edited by notalawyer; 11-17-2013 at 10:38 AM. Reason: typo

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    80620
    Posts
    9

    hey

    Ok thanks I got now.

    Sometimes i am a little slow.

    thanks again

  24. #24
    Regular Member 2OLD2W8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Black Waters
    Posts
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    Just speaking the truth. I don't normally offer opinions on topics unless I have done the research and can provide citations.

    Well, we are discussing Florida law here so that might narrow your search down a little. But I'll help you out.

    Peoples v. State, 287 So. 2d 63 - Fla: Supreme Court 1973
    State v. Commons, 592 So. 2d 317 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 3rd Dist. 1991
    Brook v. State, 999 So. 2d 1093 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 5th Dist. 2009
    Collins v. State, 475 So. 2d 968 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 4th Dist. 1985
    Moses v. State, 413 So. 2d 845 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 3rd Dist. 1982
    State v. Little, Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 4th Dist. 2013
    Thank you for the cites...........In regards to my interpretation of the statute language "a person at his/her place of business" I was wrong and stand corrected. Thank you for the enlightenment.

    However the issue of an employee engaged in open carry at work has not been addressed in the cites, the judge's opinions regarding the possession of a firearm seemed to only address concealed firearms. I didn't see any reference to the open carry of a firearm by an employee. Might it be due to the defendants being arrested and charged with possession of a concealed firearm. The issue of open carry was not in front of the court?
    “We can ignore reality, but we cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand

    "free people ought...to be armed." In so doing we grasp the larger lesson that the ability to defend ourselves is part and parcel to our freedom. George Washington , January 7, 1790

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by 2OLD2W8 View Post
    Thank you for the cites...........In regards to my interpretation of the statute language "a person at his/her place of business" I was wrong and stand corrected. Thank you for the enlightenment.

    However the issue of an employee engaged in open carry at work has not been addressed in the cites, the judge's opinions regarding the possession of a firearm seemed to only address concealed firearms. I didn't see any reference to the open carry of a firearm by an employee. Might it be due to the defendants being arrested and charged with possession of a concealed firearm. The issue of open carry was not in front of the court?
    Thank you for the enlightenment.
    My pleasure.

    Correct, the issue of open carry was not before the court, but the statute they addressed, 790.25(3), applies equally to concealed carry without a CWFL, as it does open carry. Why would there be any legal justification to consider one aspect of the statute differently than the other?

    Let me ask you about carrying a firearm while hunting/fishing/camping. Does the law distinguish between open carry and concealed carry without a CWFL? No. Are both lawful, Yes.
    How about going to the range? Can one participate in and IDPA match (concealed firearms) just as equally as one can participate in a USPSA match (open carry)? Yes.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •