Florida Concealed Carry banner

Senate Bill 1122

5K views 25 replies 15 participants last post by  BrianB 
#1 ·
#2 ·
I don't particularly care if the license term was reduced to 5 years as this would bring us in line with more states. I think Nevada originally dropped us because our permit duration was so much longer than theirs.

While it may not matter much to me, it would matter more to poor folks for whom the license fee is more burdensome.

But all of this just proves why we need unlicensed open carry. If we had UOC then this guy would be able to keep carrying while his permit was suspended once he was confident that he in fact did not have a disability.

So long as the only means of carry is via a government permission slip we do not have our 2nd amendment right to carry.
 
#3 ·
I doubt this bill will go anywhere Brian, my main concern with it is the ridiculous proficiency requirements. This would put an undue and unnecessary burden on way to many people. It looks to me like they cut and pasted the proficiency requirements from some PD some where and this level of proficiency is simply unnecessary. I'm hoping it never makes it out of the first committee.
 
#6 ·
Obviously someone has not been paying attention to how well LEO shootings go....

In addition, new language in the measure would require that “Persons who complete an instructional course pursuant…shall demonstrate their proficiency safely handling and discharging a firearm through the completion of (a) course of fire proficiency demonstration with a minimum score of 70 percent.”
 
#7 ·
Obviously someone has not been paying attention to how well LEO shootings go....

In addition, new language in the measure would require that “Persons who complete an instructional course pursuant…shall demonstrate their proficiency safely handling and discharging a firearm through the completion of (a) course of fire proficiency demonstration with a minimum score of 70 percent.”
I see. (I think?)
Passing score = 70%
But no scope, foregrip, laser, etc...

It's really not about aim, is it? :thumbsdwn
 
#8 ·
There is no logical rationale for reducing the length of time that a Florida CWFL is valid...except perhaps as a poke in the eye to gun owners. And I could be wrong about this, but the proposed range qualification requirements look like those required to obtain a G license. While one could argue that there are valid public safety considerations in expecting CWFL holders to be knowledgeable about the relevant laws and to be able to safely handle a firearm, requiring individuals wanting to protect themselves to perform timed fire strings is absurd. It is unrealistic and unnecessary to hold private citizens to the same standards as armed professionals.
 
#9 ·
Here's the "proficiency test." Holy crap. Even I had a hard time visualizing the parameters of this test. What dip$hit wrote this????

(I) Stage one.—Twenty shots must be fired from a distance
82 of 3 yards, as follows: five shots must be fired in a “one-shot
83 exercise” with 2 seconds allowed for each shot, 10 shots must be
84 fired in a “two-shot exercise” with 3 seconds allowed for each
85 two-shot sequence, and five shots must be fired in 10 seconds.
86 (II) Stage two.—Twenty shots must be fired from a distance
87 of 7 yards, as follows: five shots must be fired in 10 seconds,
88 five shots must be fired in two stages: two shots must be fired
89 in 4 seconds and three shots must be fired in 6 seconds, five
90 shots must be fired in a “one-shot exercise” with 3 seconds
91 allowed for each shot, and five shots must be fired in 15
92 seconds.
93 (III) Stage three.—Ten shots must be fired from a distance
94 of 15 yards, as follows: five shots must be fired in two stages:
95 two shots must be fired in 6 seconds and three shots must be
96 fired in 9 seconds, and five shots must be fired in 15 seconds.
97
98 All courses of fire proficiency demonstration must be scored on
99 a standard B-27 target that must be 24 inches by 45 inches in
100 size. The target must be scored using the 5, 4, 3 scoring
101 diagram in the upper left corner of the target. Optical
102 enhancers may not be used during the course of fire proficiency
103 demonstration. The course of fire proficiency demonstration must
104 be completed using live ammunition.
 
#10 ·
Here's the "proficiency test." Holy crap. Even I had a hard time visualizing the parameters of this test. What dip$hit wrote this????
It's not the current Class G qualification course of fire nor is it the current CJSTC course of fire. Perhaps they borrowed it from another state that has a proficiency standard.

I'm OK with requiring proficiency testing for police officers and for PI's and Security who carry professionally. But I am not OK with any proficiency test for someone to carry a firearm in a non-professional capacity.

That said, if unlicensed open carry was legal in the state of Florida then the state could constitutionally (as the 2A has been interpreted by SCOTUS) require whatever standards they please for a concealed weapons permit because your 2A right to carry a firearm in public would be satisfied by the unlicensed open carry. But presently the only way you can routinely carry a firearm in public is via a CWFL, so the CWFL is your avenue of exercising your fundamental 2A right (license to practice a "right" - ummmm), so no proficiency test should be able to be required in my opinion.
 
#11 ·
^^^^
:clap :clap :clap
 
#23 ·
Personally I am sitting back and waiting for the SCOTUS to provide an opinion on the NYC prohibitions.

I'm hoping for strict scrutiny.

I hope we get one more Trump appointee before they hear oral arguments.

Long live Ginsburg, but may she step down before she makes a fool of herself.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top