pipistrelle wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 11:13 pm
Stupid question but is it concealed carry when you have a loaded gun in that compartment?
It depends on state law, but a quick review of FL law indicates you don't even need a permit to carry like that in FL.
Carrying Firearms in Private Vehicles
When concerning private vehicles, the concept of Possession of Private Conveyance comes into play. Located in subsection (5) of Florida Statute 790.25, Possession of Private Conveyance states that it is legal for an individual to carry a concealed weapon in their car without a permit.
However, for this law to apply, you must meet specific criteria. Here are the requirements for carrying a loaded gun in your car:
You must be 18 years old or older. This statute does not protect anyone under the age of 18 years old at the time of the offense.
You must have a viable reason to own a gun. You must have the gun in your car for self-defense or other lawful purposes, such as driving to and from an outing that involves lawful hunting or marksmanship practice.
The gun cannot be on your person. The statute specifies that the gun must be “within the interior of a private conveyance” (in other words, inside of your vehicle) and does not protect you if the gun is on your person.
The gun must be securely encased or otherwise not readily accessible. You must keep your gun secured and ensure it cannot be grabbed easily by any passengers. This may involve having it snapped into a holster, stored in a glove compartment, or put in a gun case with a cover (locked or unlocked). No matter where it is, make sure the weapon is not “readily accessible for immediate use” and well out of your immediate reach.
The Possession in Private Conveyance subsection only applies to people who do not have a concealed carry permit. If you do have a permit, you may lawfully carry a concealed weapon in your vehicle.
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” —John Adams
pipistrelle wrote: ↑Fri Jan 28, 2022 11:13 pm
Stupid question but is it concealed carry when you have a loaded gun in that compartment?
In Florida they don't bother to charge you as long as you actually fire it at someone, as opposed to just whipping it out, for which you can get a distracted driving ticket.
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
Florida Man Stole Car "In Good Faith" Then A Train Launched It Into A House
He later tried to steal a forklift. Dude had a hell of a night.
ByJason Torchinsky
I have to admit, if we judge this in terms of scale-of-fiasco, you have to be seriously impressed with what Bradford Weitzel, a 38 year-old Florida Man in every sense of those words managed to accomplish. There are cars, trains, fruit, and even a forklift involved here. It’s like a dazzling carnival of idiotic decisions that just keep going and going, and it even ends with the suspect flagging down the cops himself. It’s so good.
I think I’ll just quote the Martin County Sheriff’s Office’s Facebook post to give you the essential details and timeline here:
38-year old Bradford Weitzel, of Port St. Lucie, told Martin County Sheriff’s Detectives that he couldn’t find his car after leaving a Martin County bar early this morning, so he stole one in a good faith effort to locate his own. He said he somehow ended up on the train tracks along Indian River Drive. That’s when Weitzel claims the vehicle he stole suddenly stopped dead on the tracks as a train was coming. So he said he got out and ran, leaving the car on the tracks. Within seconds, the train hit the car, catapulting it into a nearby home where the homeowners were sound asleep. Fortunately, they were not physically injured, although the explosive sound of a driverless car smashing into the side of their home was clearly jolting. Meanwhile, Weitzel continued on to a nearby fruit stand, where he vandalized the business then tried to steal a forklift. In the end, Weitzel said he thought it was best to flag down the responding deputies to let them know he was still looking for his car.
Bradford Weitzel was arrested and charged with Grand Theft, and Criminal Mischief. Additional charges are expected.
It is never mentioned, in multiple articles, if they figured out where his car was. I am wondering if he did not actually have one there or friends took off without him, in whatever car they came in.
Equality Florida
@equalityfl
Sen.
@loriberman
: Am I right to read that this bill would allow a parent to sue a school if their child requests a vegetarian meal for lunch and they are not consulted?
Sen. Baxley says yes.
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
Equality Florida
@equalityfl
·
Feb 8
Replying to
@equalityfl
Sen.
@TinaPolsky
asks -- what about kids with LGBTQ parents? If they come to school and it invokes questions, then what?
Sen.
@dennisbaxley
suggests that acknowledging LGBTQ people is "sexual" in nature. And teachers should stay quiet.
This is censorship.
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
Equality Florida
@equalityfl
·
Feb 8
In a furious rush, Chair
@JoeGruters
halts public testimony, rams through a vote, and adjourns the committee. The bill passes along party lines.
The march of Don't Say Gay continues despite widespread condemnation and outrage from Floridians (and the nation).
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
Matt Kirkland
@mattkirx
·
11h
Replying to
@equalityfl
and
@loriberman
Who even thought of this? So the school has to call the parents and say their kid chose to eat their vegetables? And would any parent not approve? And then what? The kid is forced to eat chicken nuggets? And these are the "small government people?"
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
Volkonski wrote: ↑Wed Feb 09, 2022 11:54 am
Matt Kirkland
@mattkirx
·
11h
Replying to
@equalityfl
and
@loriberman
Who even thought of this? So the school has to call the parents and say their kid chose to eat their vegetables? And would any parent not approve? And then what? The kid is forced to eat chicken nuggets? And these are the "small government people?"
I remember once that Jay Leno, in his opening monologue on the Tonight Show, he told a joke about the republicans wanting smaller government . . . just small enough to fit in your bedroom.
Ya know, someone with a kid in school who wanted to turn this bullshit back on them could really make a complete mockery of it and on the side force the state to spend millions on defending themselves from the damages inflicted on a young boy of British ancestry who became uncomfortable at the aspersions cast upon King George III in his history class.
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
Volkonski wrote: ↑Wed Feb 09, 2022 11:54 am
Matt Kirkland
@mattkirx
·
11h
Replying to
@equalityfl
and
@loriberman
Who even thought of this? So the school has to call the parents and say their kid chose to eat their vegetables? And would any parent not approve? And then what? The kid is forced to eat chicken nuggets? And these are the "small government people?"
The person who is asking this question is either too young to remember or just doesn't remember what Sarah Palin did when Barack Obama was President.
Michelle Obama was encouraging schools to add more nutritious choices to the school lunch menu. She was NOT asking them to remove unhealthy choices. So, the only difference is that children would have had more choice, and the additional choices would be healthy choices. Palin could not tolerate that. So, she took huge piles of cookies to an elementary school. Just because.
"It actually doesn't take much to be considered a difficult woman. That's why there are so many of us."
So the bill itself doesn't actually say that parents have to be consulted if a child asks for vegetarian lunches, but it does say it applies to any "critical decisions." What the senator subtly pointed out is that the proposed law doesn't define what a "critical decision" is. Which means the law is:
1) Unconstitutionally vague
2) Not narrowly tailored to it's purpose
3) Unconstitutionally imposes prior restraint
Slim Cognito wrote: ↑Wed Feb 09, 2022 7:22 pm
And I bet the bimbo didn't bother to check for peanuts or peanut oil or peanut butter or...
Or cyanide....
Okay, okay, too dark...
I know where the door is....
"He sewed his eyes shut because he is afraid to see, He tries to tell me what I put inside of me
He's got the answers to ease my curiosity, He dreamed a god up and called it Christianity"
Honesty, It would not surprise me if the junk food companies were not at least partially behind this. They have done worse in trying to fuck up school dinners.
x5
