-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
hb517
- Thread starter Willm3053
- Start date
77zach
Regular Member
Indeed
brboyer
Regular Member
They won't, but yes that is purely subjective...could be seconds, minutes, hours....hence one of the big issues withthe language.
That's what I was thinking.. I failed to explain that before the troll started pounding on me again and pointing out how stupid I am. I wish he would just go back the floridaconcealedcarry.org and continue to preach his expertise and his belittlement of participants over there.
77zach
Regular Member
Herein is the 180 Evers and Hammer did. They correctly pointed out that the only way to accomplish their objective was to legalize open carry for license holders. They went back on that and now have inadvertently but hopefully "briefly" sabotaged our future efforts.
Last edited:
brboyer
Regular Member
No, no 180...they, correctly, stated that open carry is the best way to accomplish it. Others, in positions of power/influence, disagreed...so here we are.
Last edited:
deserteagle50
Regular Member
did they change the wording again??
CS/CS/HB 517: FirearmsTrack This Bill
GENERAL BILL by Judiciary Committee; Criminal Justice Subcommittee; Dorworth; (CO-INTRODUCERS) Baxley; Caldwell; Corcoran; Gaetz; Plakon; Tobia; Workman
Firearms; Provides that person in compliance with terms of concealed carry license may openly carry handgun notwithstanding specified provisions; allows Division of Licensing of DACS to take fingerprints from concealed carry license applicants; provides that person may not openly carry handgun or carry concealed weapon or firearm into specified locations; provides that concealed carry licensees shall not be prohibited from carrying or storing firearm in vehicle for lawful purposes, etc.
EFFECTIVE DATE: upon becoming a law
CS/CS/HB 517: FirearmsTrack This Bill
GENERAL BILL by Judiciary Committee; Criminal Justice Subcommittee; Dorworth; (CO-INTRODUCERS) Baxley; Caldwell; Corcoran; Gaetz; Plakon; Tobia; Workman
Firearms; Provides that person in compliance with terms of concealed carry license may openly carry handgun notwithstanding specified provisions; allows Division of Licensing of DACS to take fingerprints from concealed carry license applicants; provides that person may not openly carry handgun or carry concealed weapon or firearm into specified locations; provides that concealed carry licensees shall not be prohibited from carrying or storing firearm in vehicle for lawful purposes, etc.
EFFECTIVE DATE: upon becoming a law
rvrctyrngr
Regular Member
Yes. It's been amended several times.
deserteagle50
Regular Member
didn't 234 & 517 match earlier today ?
rvrctyrngr
Regular Member
Depends on whether or not the Patronis amendment was accepted today...I don't have the answer. I quit following it yesterday when that amendment was offered, and haven't seen any updates.
brboyer
Regular Member
No, 517 is still in the version that permits licensed open carry. They have not yet adopted the amendment the Senate did, according to their website. (But I'm sure that is just a technicality)
I just missed the floor discussion today.
Plus there is another offered amendment...
It's set for 3rd reading.
Last edited:
That's where I got it from, SB234 amendment of the 27th. I'd been on 48 hours shifts and hadn't seen its latest..
On the point of the new amendment, it means I can removed my coat, get into the vehicle, remove the weapon and place it in the safe or console without being subject to arrest because I removed my coat outside the vehicle and intentionally allowed my weapon to be seen, correct?
This also means I don't have to get into the vehicle, remove & stow the firearm then get out of vehicle to remove my coat, correct?
I question this because it is the exact scenario that happened to me just in reverse. I got out of my vehicle wearing the firearm, reached into the vehicle to retrieve my over shirt. I was seen by LEO and approached and questioned. I was told I had just violated the CCW law and I needed to be careful next time. Had it been an A-hole LEO I hate to think what he could’ve done if he wanted..
rvrctyrngr
Regular Member
What you describe is my understanding of the intent of the legislation.
Still doesn't mean some LEO isn't going to arrest/harass you if he/she sees your weapon, as 'brief' is not defined in the statute. You might beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride.
Ture there. Had I not been wearing my uniform t-shift it may have gone down in a different way.
I hate the word brief and its possible interpretation by any given LEO.
I think he was just educating me on what I knew already and it was my bad for doing it. I’ve done it before but that was the time LEO saw it. He was cool and I think he just wanted to talk to a fellow public servant before heading off on shift. If every LEO was like that I think we would be a lot better off. I just know there are some out there that can be real A-holes sometimes. Beating the ride is what I worry about most of the time.
Freakin obsurd.
rvrctyrngr
Regular Member
I'm pretty much opposed to any verbiage that can be left up to the interpretation of LE, though the verbiage now at least makes them HAVE to think.
Yes, the LEO in your encounter could certainly have ruined your day, had had the mind to do so. I do not believe that most LEOs are looking to do that, and are more like the one you were fortunate enough to encounter.