Florida Constitutional Carry

[seandizzie]

You are correct in that it doesn't enshrine the "right" to shoot up a crowded theater, for example, only the right to keep and bear.

what? I never said anything about this, pure lunacy.

The 2A gives the government the right to regulate the militia, and that militia is allowed to bear arms. The militias were to protect against a centralized military threat.

Not granting you the privilege to walk around town with a gun how you see fit.

That is a common misconception from the gun community, Imo. don’t get me wrong I fully support people being able to use firearms to protect themselves and use them how they see fit. I just don’t see this protection coming from the second amendment, like many people like to claim, if you understand original purpose of the 2A

The arms you would need to fight off a modern day military would include F-15’s and Nukes, according to our current president. You’re not shooting down a C-130 gunship in orbit raining 40 Mike Mike down on you with your AR 15..

The idea of the original purpose of the 2A, standing up to a centralized military threat with proper arms got thrown out the door a century ago.

Edit- the 2 A has been neutered to a shadow of its original intention

 

[RHINOWSO]

what? I never said anything about this, pure lunacy.

The 2A gives the government the right to regulate the militia, and that militia is allowed to bear arms. The militias were to protect against a centralized military threat.

Not granting you the privilege to walk around town with a gun how you see fit.

That is a common misconception from the gun community, Imo. don’t get me wrong I fully support people being able to use firearms to protect themselves and use them how they see fit. I just don’t see this protection coming from the second amendment, like many people like to claim, if you understand original purpose of the 2A

The arms you would need to fight off a modern day military would include F-15’s and Nukes, according to our current president. You’re not shooting down a C-130 gunship in orbit raining 40 Mike Mike down on you with your AR 15..

The idea of the original purpose of the 2A, standing up to a centralized military threat with proper arms got thrown out the door a century ago.

 

[RHINOWSO]

The arms you would need to fight off a modern day military would include F-15’s and Nukes, according to our current president. You’re not shooting down a C-130 gunship in orbit raining 40 Mike Mike down on you with your AR 15..

<The Taliban has entered the chat>

 

[IronBeard]

This guy seems to get it. Not sure if I trust him, though...

Could be russian dis-information, I guess...

 

[seandizzie]

<The Taliban has entered the chat>

The Taliban did not defeat anyone.

We left.

Also, you’re showing a guy holding an RPG… is the precious 2A allowing you to freely purchase them??

 

[seandizzie]

Exert from the Heller decision.

After announcing that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess firearms, the Supreme Court explained that, [l]ike most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.29 Nevertheless, the Court left for another day an analysis of the full scope of the Second Amendment.30 The Court did clarify, however, that nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of firearms, among other presumptively lawful regulations.31 As for the kind of weapons that may obtain Second Amendment protection, the Court explained that Miller limits Second Amendment coverage to weapons in common use at the time that the reviewing court is examining a particular firearm, which, the Court added, is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.32


The 2A is most definitely regulatory, as to what you can and can not have. "the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited". Meaning... yes, it can be infringed!

 

[M60Gunner]

For me the issue is not the law but the uniformed officers who don’t know the law and are not required to know the law, who will be the arresting officers. See Heiden vs NC. Only case I can think of where I agreed with Sotomayor who was the lone dissenter I believe.

 

[seandizzie]

For me the issue is not the law but the uniformed officers who don’t know the law and are not required to know the law, who will be the arresting officers. See Heiden vs NC. Only case I can think of where I agreed with Sotomayor who was the lone dissenter I believe.

 

[DustyDog]

what? I never said anything about this, pure lunacy.

Actually, you said: "The 2A doesn’t give you the right to do what ever you want with arms."

To which I responded: "You are correct in that it doesn't enshrine the "right" to shoot up a crowded theater, for example... "

The Second Amendment is a restriction on government, not a blank check for them to do whatever they want. Jesus...

My father was correct when he used to say "Both ignorant and free cannot be." : )

 

[DustyDog]

Edit- the 2 A has been neutered to a shadow of its original intention

I guess I missed the part of the Constitution that explains the process for "neutering" Amendments...

 

[RHINOWSO]

The Taliban did not defeat anyone.

We left.

That pretty much defines defeat. We quit. We left.

 

[RHINOWSO]

Also, you’re showing a guy holding an RPG… is the precious 2A allowing you to freely purchase them??

You might even consider yourself conservative, but you bow down to the left and resign yourself to defeat.

 

[seandizzie]

That pretty much defines defeat. We quit. We left.

no it doesn’t

How long did you want to kick that dead horse?

 

[seandizzie]

You might even consider yourself conservative, but you bow down to the left and resign yourself to defeat.

Obviously you are not capable of having an objective facts based conversation.

 

[seandizzie]

I guess I missed the part of the Constitution that explains the process for "neutering" Amendments...

Read the heller decision.

It is not unlimited.

Do you grasp what that means?

 

[RHINOWSO]

no it doesn’t

How long did you want to kick that dead horse?

You poor thing, you obviously can't grasp military / political concepts.

Bless your poor little heart.

Enjoy licking.

 

[ABlaster]

I think there is a time and place for open carry, but in general when in normal clothing and out in public I do think it is most tactically advantageous to keep weapons concealed. That way you get to pick when and if you become involved in a conflict that happens to manifest in your presence.

The last thing anyone wants is to not be a cop and suddenly have people running up to you expecting you to solve their retail theft from the Circle K, or the mentally ill person that starts trashing the mall, or their domestic fight because you have a gun on your hip.

I agree that we should be able to openly carry, but I also think it’s best not to. I usually ask this in discussions about open carry, so I will here as well.

Aside from the political statement, why would you want to open carry? What benefit does it provide you or the people around you?

Cops open carry in secure holsters and have more training than you would expect in weapon retention techniques. They have vests that will stop the caliber they are carrying and have immediate access to help on the radio, which comes a hell of a lot faster than trying to manipulate a cell phone under stress.

 

[M60Gunner]

In some states and jurisdictions even having a ccw is “only an affirmative defense” against the fact you are carrying a concealed weapon. Like many of you our belief is our right to self defense is form our creator and I need nothing else. However, the encroachment is so far afield we are forced to jump through hoops or be threatened with incarceration and loss of livelihood. @Bowhntr6 would like to hear your thoughts as a fellow officer.

 

[M60Gunner]

I think there is a time and place for open carry, but in general when in normal clothing and out in public I do think it is most tactically advantageous to keep weapons concealed. That way you get to pick when and if you become involved in a conflict that happens to manifest in your presence.

The last thing anyone wants is to not be a cop and suddenly have people running up to you expecting you to solve their retail theft from the Circle K, or the mentally ill person that starts trashing the mall, or their domestic fight because you have a gun on your hip.

I agree that we should be able to openly carry, but I also think it’s best not to. I usually ask this in discussions about open carry, so I will here as well.

Aside from the political statement, why would you want to open carry? What benefit does it provide you or the people around you?

Cops open carry in secure holsters and have more training than you would expect in weapon retention techniques. They have vests that will stop the caliber they are carrying and have immediate access to help on the radio, which comes a hell of a lot faster than trying to manipulate a cell phone under stress.

Yea the radio is the most important piece of kit. Drilled into us at the academy.

 

[Timbo229]

Yep... but I would prefer to be able to see it, than have to make assumptions about an unknown quantity. And again, it depends where and when.

For 200 years, nearly no one "concealed carried". It became popular when the government said "OK, we will 'permit' you to carry concealed-only", and some responded "Yeah, THAT'S what I want! A little-bitty pistol shoved in my sweaty underwear!" Kinda like the Jon Lovitz bit:




re: History in the South, at least:

"Southern states generally adopted a different approach by broadly prohibiting concealed carry but leaving open carry unregulated.

Southern laws were geared specifically to address concerns about publicly carrying concealed firearms.

[Also} ...some Northern states only prohibited concealed carry...

...in the nineteenth century, many states prohibited carrying concealed weapons because concealing a weapon showed a person had a nefarious intent.Openly carrying weapons, on the other hand, was viewed as the manly, socially acceptable way to go armed during a person’s everyday life.Under this view, because there was a tradition of open carry even when concealed carry was banned, there is a general Second Amendment right to public carry.

...many Southern states adopted prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons that did not include openly carrying weapons. And others explicitly excepted open carry from the scope of laws prohibiting concealed carry."

All from:
https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/55/5/articles/files/55-5_Frassetto.pdf

Regardless, especially anywhere where carry of any kind is now banned or restricted, crime is 100 times worse now than it was in the past, so, what is the point?

I'm not speaking about tactics, I'm speaking about rights and laws. It shouldn't be illegal for me to carry open when the only people around are alligators. But if you want to talk tactics, then what's best for cops should be best for the Citizen, since we're all just people under those clothes.

As for the "making yourself a target" line, what percentage of people shot by criminals are open-carriers? I'm willing to bet less than 1%. Criminals don't make a habit of targeting obviously armed persons, they are looking for unarmed victims... which concealed carriers just happen to look like as well! And if they get the drop on you, good luck pulling that two-finger pistol out of your drawers... you're going to need it! : )

Cops are only considered just people when it’s a matter of convenience, other wise when they screw up people want to hold them to the high standards than just people under the same clothes. So I guess it’s whatever someone want to make at the time. Cops are not just people, they deal with people that most don’t want to for one reason or another, the bad guys know there name and face, yes that matters when there out in public with there family and are approached by one. Not many jobs carry that threat. And my opinion has been formulated from 38 years on the road. That’s why my windows on my vehicles are darker and my peace keeper is always with me. My family will not be a victim.