[NRA_Member33063]

Go to the article and vote...There are two "Yes" and two "No" possibilities, with the "No"s in the lead.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/todaysbuzz/thursday/sfl-should-florida-join-the-states-proposing-concealed-weapons-without-permits-20120307,0,3013435.story

[Sniper03]

I have an opinion that is two fold. First of all a carry permit is not all a bad idea. For the simple reason in some states it requires a person to get some sort on minimal training. And forces them to shoot the weapon and become slightly familiure with it. Rather than just buying one and carrying it and may have never learned proper loading and shooting techniques. Some have never actualy fired the weapon believe it or not! The other issue is those who should not have a carry permit just getting a weapon and carrying it. I am not speaking of the average law abiding citizen. With all the fake IDs and everything running ramped on the street who knows who the person actualy is. Now for the second part of the answer. I believe that any government agency should not have the right to impede any law abiding citizen from obtaining a permit. Including making it so difficult to obtain one that it is hardly worth the effort. I think that should be a violation of the law in itself! *Like Chicago for example with the liberal scum bags they have running their government and making it difficult at best for any good citizen to gain a permit. Just reiterating, if a good citizen wants a carry permit and has not been convicted of a crime or mentally not suitable by a court they should receive a permit with no delay!
God Bless our Second Amendment Right!

03

[danf_fl]

There is no mention of the 3 day waiting period now in effect for those who do not have a CWP.

Under current guidelines, that would make everyone have to wait 3 days.

[Mason609]

Originally Posted by danf_fl

There is no mention of the 3 day waiting period now in effect for those who do not have a CWP.

Under current guidelines, that would make everyone have to wait 3 days.

I don't really see a change with the waiting period. Personally, that's why I agree with Sniper on why permits are a good idea. Also, because it keeps someone from buying a gun so they can exact revenge on a bully (actually, yes, it can happen - will it, that is something different).

[BenLuby]

Originally Posted by Mason609

I don't really see a change with the waiting period. Personally, that's why I agree with Sniper on why permits are a good idea. Also, because it keeps someone from buying a gun so they can exact revenge on a bully (actually, yes, it can happen - will it, that is something different).

We don't have a three day waiting period here in Georgia, and we don't have bullies littering the streets after being mean to someone.
I agree with requiring the permit after a fashion, and I disagree with it in a constitutional aspect.

[rjd3282]

A permit is just a tax for you to carry. A tax is an infringement, your rights should not be taxed. It's no different than the government telling you that you need to purchase a permit to exercise your right to free speech. Or I'm sorry sir you can't plead the 5th you don't have a permit for that.
So we let them make us pay for our rights and soon the price will be too high for the ordinary man to pay. Then only the rich and powerful will have rights. Ever notice how the government uses words like permit, levee, fees and license? They know they couldn't get away with it if they called it a tax.
Mandatory training doesn't wash either. Here's how that plays out. Oh, I'm sorry sir you aren't smart enough to have that right. So once again we have an elite of "smart" people telling the rest of us we are too stupid to have rights. You know the smart people like the ones in D.C. How's that working out?

[hotrodz32]

Originally Posted by BenLuby

We don't have a three day waiting period here in Georgia, and we don't have bullies littering the streets after being mean to someone.
I agree with requiring the permit after a fashion, and I disagree with it in a constitutional aspect.

The Vermont style constitutional carry law has already been adopted in AK AZ WY and MT with MT restricted to some areas. 11 other states are considering it KY CO IA GA ME NH OH SC SD TN and VA. Remember constitutional carry is a right not a privilege to be abused by anti gun govt agents. If you are not a felon ect and can legally buy a gun you should be able to carry it without kissing someone's a$$ for privilege

[TheOldMan]

Originally Posted by hotrodz32

If you are not a felon ect and can legally buy a gun you should be able to carry it without kissing someone's a$$ for privilege

Totally agree.. !

[Doc3402]

I couldn't answer it. In the first choice I favor the restriction that permit holders should be able to show they can actually handle the weapon safely. Without the comment "This is nuts" on the No answer I would have chosen No.

On the second choice, "The Second Amendment doesn't have licensing restrictions, and neither should states", I can't answer yes, because the Tenth Amendment gives the states the right to institute restrictions on anything not covered in other amendments. I certainly wasn't going to vote no.

In other words, it is an obviously biased poll designed to make the point the liberal media wants to make.