Major Investigation..."In Florida, it's easy to get license to carry gun."

A

allenomics

New member
Some criminals qualify for concealed weapons. This is pretty much the theme of a major investigative story reported by "The Orlando Sentinel."

Check it out...FYI.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...jan28,0,4080624.story?coll=orl-home-headlines

If this link doesn't bring up the story (due to archiving), run a search for it at www.orlandosentinel.com.

What are your thoughts? Does the concealed carry law need to be amended? What impact does a story like this and possible amendments to the law have on law abiding citizens?
 
The National Rifle Association, the prime mover behind the state's nearly 20-year-old concealed weapon law, says it's the court system that is broken, not the gun -licensing system.

The problem rests with gaps within law enforcement and with "bleeding-heart, criminal-coddling judges and prosecutors," said Marion P. Hammer, Tallahassee lobbyist for the NRA and its affiliate, the Unified Sportsmen of Florida.
Click to expand...

There`s part of the problem. I also have no dought that the reporter exaggerated on some these statements.
 
These same people can own a firearm for the same reason. But why are they complaining. Would the OS rather these people carry the guns that they legally own without a permit? Isn't it better that they care to get a license to legally carry?
 
I hate to see CC laws getting this kind of publicity. Although I haven't read the Florida CC laws - it's hard for me to believe that people with backgrounds such as those are actually supposed to be getting a CC permit.
 
These people don't have convictions... they were charged and for whatever reason, they pleaded nolo or whatnot, and no formal conviction was entered.

Sounds like a judicial problem to me.

Probably easier to just blame guns instead of the revolving door of the criminal "justice" system.
 
As has been stated many times before:

If the state deems it safe for them to live in my neighborhood, it is safe for them to carry a gun.


I would go so far as to say that since a CHL is an infringement on the Second Amendment, and a carry permit does nothing to deter criminals from carrying, we should maybe think about issuing CHLs only to people who have been released from incarceration{after they have completed any parole conditions and are released from supervision} and let the rest of the law abiding populace carry without infringement
 
The loopholes enabled John Corporal to obtain a license to carry a gun.

The Lake Worth man pleaded guilty and received 18 months probation in 1998 for pulling a gun on his roommate and threatening to kill him, according to court records. The judge withheld a formal conviction.

In 2002, he pleaded guilty to grand theft. He was accused of stealing $96,058 from a medical imaging company he worked for, according to a police report. Again, a judge withheld a formal conviction.

He was sentenced to 10 years probation, which ended early in March 2005.

The state gave him a license to carry a gun in 2006.
Click to expand...

These are not loopholes. They are common sense.

Stealing 96,058 from a company is likely a white collar crime and has nothing to do with a gun. That doesn't mean it is a good thing, but it is not related to gun ownership.

Once upon a time I had a roommate. That roommate was found to be using drugs. Even though I think drugs should be legal, not in my house. So I began to let him know that he would be leaving soon. At that point, I locked up my Beretta 8045 and never unlocked it again until he was gone. I was threatened (apparently he didn't like being kicked out) with being reported to have "pulled my gun" on him, something that never happened and would not happen in a million years. Fortunately the cops, on the day of his departure, saw the type of person he was and ignored his accusation, not even wanting to see the gun.

So let's be a little careful about roommates claiming a gun was pulled on them. The reason the judge withheld adjudication is probably that he saw through a false accusation designed to garner a 3-year mandatory minimum and made simply out of revenge for a cat fight.

So far, I see this permit holder as possibly someone I'd rather not associate with, but not someone who is a proven danger with a gun.

Ever been at the scene of a sensational event, making you a first-hand witness? Then later, you read the newspaper account and wonder whether you were drunk or at a different event?

Be careful what you read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top