RE: the case of OC/CC in DC...
Yesterday, DC asked for "at least" a 180 day stay on the court's ruling, so the OC or CC window presently open in DC may close shortly. We await the court granting the stay or not.
But even after the stay -- or during it, while DC "works on" a carry law -- DC could decide to go may-issue, with all kinds of "disqualifiers" listed, so that no one can ever get a CC permit. The BIGGEST disqualifier -- and most popluar in may-issue states -- is not having a "good" or "substantial" or "compelling" reason to apply for a CC permit.
No, surprisingly NOT, protecting your LIFE (or family, or another good citizen, etc.) is not considered "substantial" or "compelling" -- despite a least one court ruling otherwise, as in Wollard vs. Sheridan in MD (2012).
Like it's been for residents of The Not So Great State of Hawaii for many years now, HI is (on paper) SUPPOSED to issue CC permits, but it's may-issue and never DOES issue permits. It has never heard any "good & compelling reason" to issue any (again, one's life is not considered a "good & compelling reason"), so it never issues any CC permits. There's plenty of crime in HI< but its residents can't protect themselves from it outside of their homes (and who can afford stay home 24/7, or even WANT to...what about going to work, school, etc.). They're are only allowed (!) the right to exercise HALF of the 2nd Amendment/RKBA -- to "keep arms" @ home (yet ONLY after they are duly registered with the local police, of course) -- but not allowed to exercise the OTHER half: The "bear arms" part -- such as taking them past their front door with a CC permit (OC is not allowed in HI, either).
You need BOTH halves of something to make it whole! HI (at the very least) needs to go SHALL-issue. HI and every other state that HAS may-issue should be ruled unconstitutional as a right delayed/impeded is a right denied. And rights should not be subjected to arbitrary approval/disapproval, which a may-issue policy clearly demonstrates.
So only a SHALL-issue CC policy in DC would be an acceptable outcome of all this after the legal dust settles, not MAY-issue. UNpermitted OC would be outstanding. Constitutional Carry would be the BEST, but who thinks DC would go there?
But back to Florida...and I'm asking this here in the Florida sub-forum because you all would know and could correct any misunderstandings I have:
Wasn't Florida the state that "set the standards" some years back when it allowed carry (forget which it was, shall-issue CC I guess). Up until then, most states didn't have CC available to its residents, or, it was may-issue CC (even if some state DID have Unpermitted OC also). All the other states then started following FL's example and went to shall-issue CC. Even Texas did, when it went shall-issue. And people from other states wanted to apply for a Florida CC permit back then (non-resident permit), too, because their HOME state didn't have CC yet.
Wasn't it FLORIDA that got the ball rolling on all that back then?
So people in OTHER states who finally got shall-issue CC back then can thank Florida for blazing the trail, yes?
Am I recalling this correctly?
So I was surprised to read here about FL's State Constitution "is purposely written to deny the right to carry firearms." (quoting 77zach)
If so, then that document REALLY needs some editing! ;-)