Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill14564
If that was the case then there would have been little to no need for the permit application. The process could have been to acquire the weapon and then rubber stamp the permit. But that wasn’t the process.
The requirements for each were slightly different according to what can be found online. Perhaps in practice they were the same but online they have slight differences.
A prohibited person cannot legally purchase a weapon. A person who legally possessed was not automatically granted a carry permit two days ago, all that changed yesterday. Not sure why you cannot understand that.
Another way to look at it… If there was nothing additional required to qualify for a permit then why not issue the permit with the weapon today? Reciprocity with other states requires a permit. Not requiring a permit in FL puts citizens at risk of forgetting when they travel out of state. Why do that? Why not just issue the permit automatically? If there is a reason to NOT do that then there is some significant difference, at least to the state of FL.
|
Years back a person didn't need a permit to carry a weapon. Anti-gun elements, they've been around a long time, over time got the politicians to pass laws banning concealed or open carry. Eventually people got tired of the government ignoring the Constitution and they pushed the politicians to enact laws that allowed for concealed carry with a permit. This was the first step. It has taken some time but finally we are getting the government back to obeying the Constitutional rights for the individual to keep and bear arms without needing an unconstitutional permit to do so. That is why there were carry permits.
Remember the 2nd Amendment is a right just like free speech, and the other rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution. You are right, if a person can legally purchase, own and possess a firearm they should be able to keep and bear that gun without a permit.