Gun Laws

This guy complains that Florida’s constitutional carry is dangerous because there is no training requirement for people to carry a weapon. While I agree that people need training, this guy is being a disingenuous prick. Let me tell you why.

This is how he fulfills the “instructor must observe the student firing a weapon” requirement that is under Florida’s current CCW training requirement. Does that look like a class being taught by an instructor that cares about firearms training? Does that look like a high quality class? He gives a 2 hour class, where there is a 20 question quiz at the end that he gives the students the answers to, then makes them fire a single round into a bullet trap.

His class is nothing more than a scam to meet the bare requirements of the law, extract $49 from students, and try to sucker them into taking other courses that aren’t required by the law. Reading that article, I would steer clear of Brandon Gun School. There are other schools out there that deliver a much better class than that, and aren’t of the “I’m a gunowner, but” brand of instructor who is willing to sell out gun owners for a quick buck…

Let me start by saying that I am not a lawyer, and you therefore shouldn’t rely upon my advice. With that being said, here is my reading on the new “constitutional carry” law that was signed by the governor today. (pdf alert, but not stored here at SectorOcho)

It removes the legal requirement to have a concealed weapons permit for anyone who can legally receive a concealed weapons permit in the state of Florida. If also removes the restriction against having a firearm in a pharmacy that was previously in effect for anyone not a LEO or a CWP holder.

Places that are off limits to carry remain otherwise unchanged. If you are legally permitted to carry a concealed weapon, carrying a weapon at a school is a misdemeanor. I still advise maintaining a permit because permit holders do not have to go through a waiting period for purchases.

Here is the big change, as far as I am concerned:

790.251 Protection of the right to keep and bear arms in motor vehicles for self-defense and other lawful purposes; prohibited acts; duty of public and private employers; immunity from liability; enforcement.—
(2) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section, the term:
(c) “Employee” means any person who is authorized to carry a concealed weapon or concealed firearm under s. 790.01(1) possesses a valid license issued pursuant to s. 790.06 and:
1. Works for salary, wages, or other remuneration;
2. Is an independent contractor; or
3. Is a volunteer, intern, or other similar individual for an employer.

As used in this section, the term “firearm” includes ammunition and accoutrements attendant to the lawful possession and use of a firearm.

No public or private employer may violate the constitutional rights of any customer, employee, or invitee as provided in paragraphs (a)-(e):
(c) No public or private employer shall condition employment upon either:
1. The fact that an employee or prospective employee is authorized to carry a concealed weapon or concealed firearm under s. 790.01(1) holds or does not hold a license issued pursuant to s. 790.06; or
2. Any agreement by an employee or a prospective employee that prohibits an employee from keeping a legal firearm locked inside or locked to a private motor vehicle in a parking lot when such firearm is kept for lawful purposes.
This subsection applies to all public sector employers, including those already prohibited from regulating firearms under the provisions of s. 790.33.

If you recall, the previous law was a bit of a gray area when it came to guns in parking lots. Take that, Disney.

A bunch of other stuff was added that governs schools and school boards. I haven’t read that yet.

So there you have it, some big changes coming to the state on July 1 when the law takes effect. I will be waiting to see some lawyer’s interpretations of the new law.