True, but we don't require people to prove they will be proficient in raising children, no requirement to prove they are competent to vote, no requirement to prove they know to eat healthy foods and to maintain proper health.
Driving tests for a driver's license are a joke. In many areas if you can start the car and drive around the block using turn signals, you are good to go. You don't have to demonstrate how to react in an emergency situation. There are far, far more people driving motor vehicles than carry firearms.

So? She could claim the Devil made her do it. That doesn't change the fact that the stand your ground law says her action was illegal.

No, no sense of security. More of a sense that every little bit helps and this new law removes a little bit.

Not sure I agree with your #2. If those people went to the class to obtain the permit then they had not immediately disregarded the law. Now, perhaps when the permit was denied they chose to disregard the law but then again, perhaps not.

I don't see the relevance of this story.

There are requirements to purchase a firearm and there were requirements for the carry permit. While very similar, the requirements were not the same. At the very least, as others have pointed out, there was a requirement to demonstrate proficiency in handling the firearm that no longer exists.

Then I go back to what I wrote earlier: If the carry permit did not add stop anyone then it was not a roadblock and there was no need to do away with it. If the carry permit *did* stop some then those individuals who were not eligible to carry firearms last year are suddenly able to carry today and that's scary.

Whataboutism is not a strong argument.

Unless you are shooting an AR-15 through a closed slider and closed blinds. (Note: every case is different and we don't have all the details of either case but on the face of it, things don't look as absolute as the statement above)

Oh So Wrong.................If in Florida, and in most other states........it is against the law to be carrying and under the influence. They were not and are not law-abiding.

Florida law 790.151 prohibits carrying a firearm while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage.

Just read, it's a Federal Law that officers can not drink and carry their gun.
Have not found the HR reference, but it sounds like they are criminal dirt-bags, not law-abiding.

:oops:

There are states that allow concealed carry if you you have a permit....and I believe the same applies here. If you are out of state and travel here I believe you will need to show your permit from the state that has a reciprocity agreement with FL. I will keep my CC permit since I do travel outside FL

All 25 states except the 3 mentioned will allow concealed carry for anyone of age and is legally allowed to have a weapon. Look it up.

The reason for eliminating the requirement for a carry permit is that the right to keep and bear arms is a constitutional right. Do you need a permit to vote which is a constitutional right? Do you need a permit to stand on the corner and express your opinion, that is a constitutional right.
If an individual was not eligible to carry a firearm last year, how are they legally allowed to do so now? In order to legally carry without a permit, you still have to meet the federal and state requirements to own a firearm. The same requirements for obtaining a concealed carry permit.
So what are the reasons a person was not eligible to carry a firearm last year that aren't there now?

That what all your posts have been.

Not sure why you felt you needed to lecture me with all that. I was just noting the difference in the requirements between having a CCW and the new law since you stated the requirements were both the same.

Well, my mother was able to get a gun. But don’t worry, it’s the kind that won’t kill anyone. ( her words) It’s a Glock and she’s never fired a gun in her life. It shouldn’t be that easy and the person shouldn’t believe there are guns that won’t kill.

.............for the bad guy/gal/it. :D

They already assume this! The difference is when a bad person decides to use a gun then there are fewer good guys to stop them before police get there. Even in countries with no guns there are guns or bad guys resort to using machetes, cars, and chemical sprays. You don’t want protection your choice, but I want a chance to protect myself.

Perfect analysis!

You’re free to leave. Sorry about the pun, but no one’s holding a gun to your head to make you stay.

Personally, I like the fact that I can protect my family and my property…NO questions asked! As long as I’m smart about it…

Agree! We should eventually have less crime because the robbers don’t know if you have a gun and they don’t want to be surprised. I suggest the OP move to Chicago where they have the strictest gun laws and we all know the shootings that go on there every day. Chicago isn’t the only city that’s bad, NYC, LA, SF and many others that have strict gun laws that protect the criminals and screw the law abiding citizen

Less gun control, more gun deaths!
 

These are the 20 states with the highest firearm homicide rates in the country along with their gun-friendliness scores:

Louisiana: 11.0 (3)
Mississippi: 10.2 (5)
Alabama: 9.5 (4)
Missouri: 8.5 (5)
Maryland: 7.4 (1)
South Carolina: 7.4 (3)
Tennessee: 6.7 (4)
Illinois: 6.5 (2)
Arkansas: 6.2 (3)
Georgia: 6.2 (4)
Alaska: 6.0 (5)
New Mexico: 5.7 (4)
Oklahoma: 5.7 (4)
Indiana: 5.3 (4)
Delaware: 5.1 (2)
North Carolina: 5.0 (4)
Nevada: 4.8 (3)
Ohio: 4.8 (4)
Kentucky: 4.7 (4)
Florida: 4.6 (4)

What’s your point? Every stop had always been a potential shooter. This new law doesn’t change that.

Criminals don’t pay attention to laws. If guns were illegal to have only the criminals would have them.

Citizens with guns is the reason for the 4 th of July

The point was, highly restrictive gun control does not reduce crime.........what's your point?? No one says gun-friendly reduces crime. :popcorn::popcorn:

Criminals run free
 

But those cities let criminals run free, at least Florida locks them up. Milwaukee, WI is almost as bad with several shootings a night. You do need a permit to concealed carry. Felons and those under 21 are not allowed to carry a gun. It doesn't seem to stop them, after all criminals don't abide by laws. In Milwaukee, most gun crimes are dropped or pled down. I'd rather take my chances in Florida.

Dangerous For criminals

Bullspit. If you were a "career criminal" would you choose to "do business" in a State like Florida? Or, might you feel more at ease someplace with harsh gun laws, like Chicago, New York, St. Louis? Sorry, but the ONLY thing that will deter bad guys with guns is good guys with guns.

Bulls-eye! (to coin a phrase...)

Gun laws
 

You still have a background check to purchase a gun, so not everyone can buy a gun. The “bad” guys already have guns. Most crimes are done with stolen weapons.

Yep.

Proof of that was some years back when permit-to-carry went into effect in Minnesota. Minnesota is super-restrictive in a lot of ways but surprisingly not when it comes to carrying firearms. You can open carry in that state if you have a permit and some did, though my personal opinion is that the ONLY person who needs to know if I am carrying or not is me.

Anyway, there were all the usual doleful predictions about what horrible things were going to be happening once permit-to-carry went into effect. The anti - 2nd. Amendment folks spared no effort in trying to convince other Minnesotans that the street departments of the various Minnesota cities were going to be sweeping up dead bodies on a routine basis every morning. Didn't happen, of course. But one thing that DID happen was that there were a lot of businesses that had signs prominently posted in their windows "Guns Not Allowed On These Premises". They came down right quick when it became apparent that those were the businesses being targeted by the criminals!

Bad guys don't like their victims shooting back.

Statistically, the opposite is true.

Maybe not "no one;" I counted at three posts with that assertion on the last two pages of this thread.

Pathetic response! You a lobbyist for the NRA/Gun industry? There is no truth to what you have stated. Again, Pathetic!

Not Scary
 

Why is it so scary??? Do you really thing the Bad Guys out there have Carry Permits? People have been carrying guns without permits for a very long time. Nothing will change.

“Ignorance is Bliss”

Overreact much? :1rotfl:

The most important part of the equation, however, is that the Second Amendment enshrined in our Constitution attests to "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". You don't have to prove yourself or hit a target at so many yards to exercise a Constitutional right - although proficiency with your chosen weapon makes a LOT of sense. One does not have to prove proficiency with the English language, for example, to exercise free speech, etc.

Fred

I'm not worried about the Bad Guy who ignored the law anyway. The people I'm worried about are the ones who own guns but were denied carry permits, the ones who own guns but didn't apply for the permit because they believed they would be denied, and the ones who didn't own guns but will now because the new law paired with old rhetoric makes it fashionable to carry. Some number of those people may be carrying now.

The Bad Guy with the gun has been there all my life. The Good Guy who is now carrying but doesn't have a clue how to react in a bad situation is what will worry me going forward.

Gun permits
 

Most of those old drunks are veterans and have permits and already carry guns.