I was at work last night and the supervisor of security came wandering through the ED. One of the nurses asked him if Florida’s new concealed carry law was going to make his job more difficult. His reply was that many people in Florida don’t realize that concealed carry doesn’t apply to the hospital. When I asked him why the law didn’t apply, his reply was that there were three reasons:

  • Concealed carry isn’t allowed on private property in Florida, unless the owner allows it
  • Concealed carry isn’t allowed in police stations, and our hospital contains a “police substation”
  • Concealed carry isn’t allowed in hospitals

When I told him that most of those statements weren’t what the law says, he told me that he and the police likely know more about the law than I do, so I should just stay in my lane. Let’s tackle his claims one at a time, with this post addressing the “property owner” argument:

The police are the ones circulating the “carry isn’t allowed on private property” trope, and I am not sure where it’s coming from. I searched the social media pages of every sheriff’s office in central Florida, along with a sampling of city police departments. This is what I found:

Hillsboro County and Tampa Police
Lake County Sheriff
Columbia County Sheriff’s Office
Sarasota Police

It’s being pushed by a fair number of law enforcement agencies all over the state. The problem here is that the law says nothing of the sort. The new law says that a person who doesn’t have a permit but would otherwise be eligible for one may still carry a concealed weapon or firearm wherever they could carry that weapon if the DID have a permit. There is a list of places off limits to carry that can be found in 790.06(12). Property owners prohibiting carry is not anywhere on that list.

The only statement that could be construed as allowing a property owner to prohibit carry is the general property rights that any property owner has. If you are in a place not specifically mentioned in the law as being prohibited for concealed carry, but it has posted “no guns” signs, and they ask you to leave, you must leave. If you refuse to leave then you are breaking the law and can be charged. Even if the property is not posted and you are asked to leave you must leave, but that is different from claiming that the “law doesn’t apply” to private property. If they don’t ask you to leave, it is legal to carry right past a “no guns” sign.

Since this is being widely pushed by some (but no all) police agencies all over the state, I can’t help by believe that this is an intentional misstatement by law enforcement to enforce a law that doesn’t exist.

Next, we will take a look at carry in hospitals and police stations.


Chris Mallory · July 2, 2023 at 12:20 pm

I spent some time in a FL hospital over the past couple of weeks. I was amazed that the entrances were not plastered with “All weapons banned” signs Both of my local KY hospitals have them posted, and the ER at Vandy requires you to enter through a metal detector, or it did 3 years ago.

pchappel · July 2, 2023 at 12:53 pm

We had a fairly similar situation in TX, but the State helped resolve it fairly quickly and well. You can post a “No Unlicensed Concealed Carry” sign which applies only to those without a license. There are the 30.06 signs that denote officially forbidden carry zones, and the 51% (alcohol sales make up more than half the revenue, so CC forbidden), but otherwise most folks are pretty OK with it. Mind, I work on a fairly liberal University Campus and after some initial hysterics, pretty much everyone got over it and is fine. You ARE required to have the LTC to carry on Campus however. But fairly easy to get down here, at least from my “I escaped from Illinois” perspective…

    Divemedic · July 2, 2023 at 12:57 pm

    I thoroughly detest the system in Texas. The law allows a property owner to prohibit carry, yet that same owner bears absolutely no legal liability for the consequences of this edict. A property owner bans carry, law abiding gun owners obey. However, since the property owner has no responsibility to protect their now defenseless invitees, a bad guy is free to shoot the place up, and the defenseless victims of the crime have no legal recourse.

      pchappel · July 3, 2023 at 11:24 am

      The only point I would disagree slightly on is that a property owner (outside of the 30.06 prohibited zones) can only post “No Unlicensed Carry” which specifically does not apply to licensed individuals. But then I am in the far North of Texas and so do not often see those signs…

        Divemedic · July 3, 2023 at 12:00 pm

        There were 30.05 and 30.06 signs posted on many of the businesses there. I have been to TX a few times, and didn’t like that a business owner can deny your right to defend yourself, yet also have no liability for not providing security if a criminal injures you while you are defenseless.

    Some Guy · July 3, 2023 at 6:40 pm

    I do have to say that God must love me for have the “No GERNS!” signs in Texas designated as 30.06 signs. Let’s freebase that one there.

Michael · July 2, 2023 at 1:12 pm

Divemedic as Heinlein said:

Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Robert A. Heinlein

Friend you cannot use logic to get someone out of an idea that they didn’t use logic to get into, I think I posted that quote earlier.

Arguing “Pseudo Law” with someone that can HR you into joblessness seems unwise.

Oddly I just got back from Wally world and a friendly police officer I knew asked me if I was packing, then looked past me and said never mind my backup just arrived. Before I drove out of the parking lot all 4 of our police cars were there.

Me, I just chose to be like the Chesire Cat and smile and vanish with the smile last to disappear.

    Divemedic · July 2, 2023 at 4:38 pm

    I dont carry at work. I’m not dumb. Other than that, I know the pecking order, and security isn’t as high on the totem pole as I am.

Matthew W · July 2, 2023 at 3:50 pm

The number of times I knew a law better than the cop…………………………..

    Michael · July 2, 2023 at 6:42 pm

    Yes, it happens Matthew but when have you ever “Won” a disagreement about the Law with a Police Officer?

    A bit like Baseball Players arguing with the Ref about a Ref Call.

    Except the Ref might toss you from the game, a Police Officer might become quite a real problem, if not today but they hold grudges.

Nathan Arizona · July 2, 2023 at 4:46 pm

Red State businesses prefer it concealed but I have seen some with it out in the open.
When visiting private property, they are usually armed, I don’t hang around with soft weak oh no a gun diaper soilers.
The local Outlaw Biker gang leader has open carried for years even before Constitutional Carry due to a shoot on sight order from rivals.
Pension monger donut molester minions don’t know jack about the law and they won’t be invited to the Sarmat rated doomsday bunkers of their paymasters.

Anonymous · July 2, 2023 at 7:02 pm

what do you think of 394.458 ?
394.458 Introduction or removal of certain articles unlawful; penalty.—
(1)(a) Except as authorized by law or as specifically authorized by the person in charge of each hospital providing mental health services under this part, it is unlawful to introduce into or upon the grounds of such hospital, or to take or attempt to take or send therefrom, any of the following articles, which are hereby declared to be contraband for the purposes of this section:
1. Any intoxicating beverage or beverage which causes or may cause an intoxicating effect;
2. Any controlled substance as defined in chapter 893; or
3. Any firearms or deadly weapon.
(b) It is unlawful to transmit to, or attempt to transmit to, or cause or attempt to cause to be transmitted to, or received by, any patient of any hospital providing mental health services under this part any article or thing declared by this section to be contraband, at any place which is outside of the grounds of such hospital, except as authorized by law or as specifically authorized by the person in charge of such hospital.
(2) A person who violates any provision of this section commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    Divemedic · July 2, 2023 at 9:28 pm

    Future post

Bad Dancer · July 2, 2023 at 7:48 pm

How did you manage to hold back your belly laughter when he said he knew the law better.

Cops are worse than schoolyard gossip or barracks lawyers, by the time we were briefed on a new law or policy it had already been weasel worded and played with to give us/them the most amount over overreach and ignorance.

The law will be announced, officers will start gossiping and be told not to discuss it pending official briefing, then the department headshed will figure out what they want to do and word will come down from on high. Did they totally ignore not just the spirit of the law but the actual letter so obvious that a five year old could understand their breach? Doesn’t matter pony up the cash to sue or get in line citizen. Or else.

SiG · July 3, 2023 at 6:57 am

This security supervisor wasn’t named Richard was he? Sounds like a real Dick.

The things from the various police and sheriff’s offices seem pretty reasonably accurate. My wife and I just renewed our CWFLs last week for the reason they all cite about travel and reciprocity. The county office was the tax collector’s and while crowded was about as well-run as I can imagine.

    Divemedic · July 3, 2023 at 7:37 am

    The issue is that there is not a thing in Florida law that makes carry on private property prohibited.

Gryphon · July 3, 2023 at 3:03 pm

I’m willing to Bet that the Confusing Nature of the (multitude of laws that apply) is quite Intentional – the ‘legislators’ know damn well they cannot just ‘Ban Guns’ or limit ‘Bearing Arms’ the way they really want to, so by creating Complicated and Contradictory ‘laws’, they allow the pigs and mall cops to act as ‘lawyers’ and decide what the ‘law’ actually means, Always to the advantage of the ‘government’.

Comments are closed.