I can’t believe that I missed this story, but better late than never.

At first glance, you would not think that Nikki Fried would be suing the Florida Department of Law Enforcement because the FDLE declared that a woman was ineligible for a Florida CCW. After all, Fried is a notorious antigun asshat. But sue the Florida Department of Agriculture did.

It all started when a woman, identified by her initials of M.S., tried to get a concealed weapons permit. In Florida, it is the Department of Agriculture that issues the permits, but it is the Florida Department of Law Enforcement that does the background checks. So FDLE did the background check and declared that M.S. has items in her criminal past that would make her ineligible to receive a CWP. The woman did what any of us would do and appealed the decision, demanding to know why she was denied. That’s when things went sideways.

In preparing for the appeal, the Dept of Agriculture asked FDLE to list the specific disqualifying offenses, but FDLE replied that her offenses must be kept secret due to Federal Law. Since Florida case law is explicit on this- if the Dept of Agriculture can’t list the specific disqualifying events, they must go ahead and issue the CWP.

I fully support this. If the government wants to take action against someone, they have to provide the evidence. If the providing the evidence is counter to the government’s interest, then they have a decision to make- release the evidence, or respect the rights of the citizen. There should be no “Open your mouth and close your eyes, you can trust us” stuff going on with regards to citizen rights.

At any rate, Fried’s department wanted to deny M.S.’s permit, so they filed a lawsuit against the FDLE, intending to force them to release the evidence. Now that Fried is out of office, that lawsuit has been settled out of court. I certainly hope that M.S. got her permit, or at least was able to see why not. A people cannot be free when they are subject to secret courts, hearings, laws, and decisions.


Jaboschreck · January 15, 2023 at 1:27 pm

Until Red State went constitutional carry it was about $40 and background check.
If the check revealed something no money back and no permit.
Local gun and pawn shops would charge $20 for a failed background check.
Bought a .40cal in early 2000’s just to see what it was about and the highway patrol officer did the background check in his car.
Some dullards think that you have to have a permit just to buy a weapon when it is just like everything else, all you need is the money.

Don Curton · January 15, 2023 at 3:50 pm

Had something similar here with my Texas LTC (or whatever acronym they’re using now). Essentially there was some divorce ugliness 20 years ago and a complaint was filed, I was served, and I went to court and had charges dismissed.

When I applied for a carry license, I was initially denied. I appealed and asked why. I was told I was arrested 20 years ago and they needed to know the disposition of the case. Well shit. I was never arrested and the charges were dismissed. I asked if they had any evidence of conviction? They answered no. But that wasn’t good enough, I had to prove I was never convicted. But if your own records have no conviction listed, what the hell do I need to add to that. It took me another 6 months of fighting to finally get my license. Complete and total BS.

Jonathan · January 16, 2023 at 6:53 am

That sounds really odd…
I can’t think of a reason that you couldn’t tell someone their own past.
Does somebody working there have a grudge against her, so they invented a reason to not issue to her? And once she challenged it, they are covering their tracks? It’s the best reason I can come up with…

    Divemedic · January 16, 2023 at 9:02 am

    My guess is that it’s related to DHS and a FISA court

Comments are closed.