Best all around gun?

[Soundguy]

too many 'if' situations.

my car (truck) is a light producing device.

I have a cwp, and can carry in my vehicle.

we have roads that bisect the nat forest . if I pull over to change a flat, I'm in the nat forest.. I have a flashlifght to do that tire changing, and I have a gun.

i'd have to be doing 'something else' illegal before i think a LEO would cite me for having a flat tire..

florida ccw/ self defense laws have changed immensely in the last few years. expanded castle, civil immumity.. etc.. etc. plenty of changes.

soundguy

It is not about hunting season. It is all about having a weapon, a flashlight and deer.

In NC it is recommended to tell an officer that you are carrying concealed if you are talking to said officer.

If an officer pulled you over and you were carrying, is there a flashlight in the vehicle? Are deer around?

If an officer arrested/cited someone based just on what I said, then I think they made a mistake. But my point is the statue, the last time I read it, only lists three elements, firearm, deer, light producing device. The law is full of some pretty dumb or contradictory statutes.

It used to be in FLA law, and I doubt it has been changed, you could carry a weapon if you were fishing, hunting, and either camping or hiking. Forgot which of the two. On the other hand, there are laws saying you cannot have a weapon in management areas. Which law is in effect? They are mutually exclusive. I would prefer to avoid being the test case. :laughing:

I am no longer familiar with FLA CCW law but I would very carefully read if the CCW law allows carry in management areas. In the past, those areas were firearm no goes out of season. In season you had better have a permit and a license. Hunting, especially on public lands, has gotten very complicated.

Thankfully the W/Oes I knew would use a good bit of discretion and common sense with these laws. As do most other officers.

Later,
Dan

 

[5030]

The issues I was talking about are broad daylight on your own property. Can't carry a rifle for coyotes, in fact can't hunt coyotes unless in possession of a valid deer hunting license. And can't open carry a pistol registered in your name without a CPL. MI has an exemption for shining deer while carrying under a CPL. No CPL, no shining or no weapons. There are cities like Grand Rapids where the chief of Police is not in agreement with private firearms ownership and obtaining a CPL is a difficult business, despite Michigans "Shall issue" law. As I said, in Jackson County it takes 4 months to jump through all the hoops. But I still think it was worth it...

Hate to bust your bubble but.....

Wild dogs (coyotes) are considered a nusiance here and there is no season on them, anytime, anyplace so long as there is a real danger to livestock or game on private property....always.

Michigan has open carry, one of the few states, I might add. I just spent 4 days carrying my 44 smith on my hip, in the open, unconcealed. It's registered to me and yes I have a concealed carry and yes, I carry a pistol concealed when appropriate.

On a concealed carry, it's up to the discretion of the local gun board as to the issuance of a permit and 4 months seems like a protracted period. On completion of the NRA sanctioned pistol carry course and certificate, at least here in Monroe County, 90 days and it's a yea or ney. It takes time for the background check and the board only meets once a month.

I don't consider that excessive by any means.

Far as GR, it's not up to the local police cheif, he has to comply with state and federal laws. One reason it's advisable to keep abreast of laws and mandates that can restrict your second Amendment rights....always.....

Far as having a flashlight in your vehicle and 'shining deer'. 99% of law enforcement officers are professional and thinking individuals. I firmly believe that normal deduction would prevail.

Concider the fact that having a concealed carry has eliminated you from the also ran status of normal, everyday citizens. If you weren't law abiding, you'd never have obtained the carry permit in the first place.

When interacting with any law enforcement, I always state I have a concealed carry. It gives them insight into my character and my desire to remain law biding.

 

[dmccarty]

too many 'if' situations.

my car (truck) is a light producing device.

I have a cwp, and can carry in my vehicle.

we have roads that bisect the nat forest . if I pull over to change a flat, I'm in the nat forest.. I have a flashlifght to do that tire changing, and I have a gun.

i'd have to be doing 'something else' illegal before i think a LEO would cite me for having a flat tire..

florida ccw/ self defense laws have changed immensely in the last few years. expanded castle, civil immumity.. etc.. etc. plenty of changes.

soundguy

Tis always about Ifs. The law is full of them. Which is one of my points.

The officer would most likely not cite you at all. I would hope not because it would be a stupid case. But your scenario meets the elements of the statute.

The reason for me mentioning this particular statue is to show how broad the laws can be. Your example of breaking down in a National Forrest could result in an arrest. Could not should. The flat tire has nothing to do with the poaching offense. Unless the CCW somehow exempts the poaching statute, the CCW law would not prevent an arrest under said poaching statute.

Another point in all of this, is that while MI has very restrictive laws, other states have laws that can bite as well. Just because one has a CCW does not mean one can carry every place. That was most certainly true when I lived in FLA and it is true in NC. Being in a management area with a firearm was a no no. CCW had nothing to do with it. The fact another statute, predating CCW, ALLOWED you to carry a weapon would not prevent one from being charged with poaching. The two statutes were mutually exclusive. Which would win in court?

Throwing out another, IF. If one is using a CCW permit one had better know the law. One also had better realize that the laws are open to interpretation by an officer, magistrate, DA, judge, and jury. Your and My interpretation of the meaning of the law is irrelevant to their opinion/interpretation.

At one time it was legal in FLA to use deadly force to stop a burglary. There was a case in West Palm Beach where a man came home and found a thief in his house. The thief ran out the back door with the man's TV. The man shot the thief in the back and killed him. The statute said the man was correct in his use of force. The DA said otherwise and put him on trial. The jury found him innocent. For what the man spent in legal fees he could have filled up his house with TV sets....

Later,
Dan

 

[Soundguy]

i'd not shoot someone, running from me, stealing from me.. tis not worth it.

someone running at me, making me think I'm gonna get hurt.. they'll get shot. doesn't matter in home, in parking lot.. at lowes. burger king.. etc.

fla citizens can now meet force with force with no dangerous need to turn your back on an assailant and try to run... that's just what I want. the bad guy seeing my back, and me not seeing him. it's about time fla law got it right, so you can 'face' your attacker.

soundguy

 

[buck12]

All this talk about permits and guns brings up a question I often have: why do American citizens have to apply for, wait, pay, and carry a permit to exercise a constitutional right?

 

[zmjc]

All this talk about permits and guns brings up a question I often have: why do American citizens have to apply for, wait, pay, and carry a permit to exercise a constitutional right?

Nooooooooooo..... not a gun rights debate, please!

I'm pretty interested in the OP's question, personally. Let's keep the post on interesting questions like "is a semi-auto 12ga shotgun good for a beginner who'd like to slay some partridge?"

 

[RoyJackson]

At one time it was legal in FLA to use deadly force to stop a burglary. There was a case in West Palm Beach where a man came home and found a thief in his house. The thief ran out the back door with the man's TV. The man shot the thief in the back and killed him. The statute said the man was correct in his use of force. The DA said otherwise and put him on trial. The jury found him innocent. For what the man spent in legal fees he could have filled up his house with TV sets....

Later,
Dan

I'd wager he recouped his legal costs from the DA..

Like Soundguy, if the assailant is running away, I'll let him go.
One thing I've read on the firearms/self defense threads on TBN (and dedicated gun forums) is about killing and intruder. All your duty is to stop the intruder by whatever means available. If stopping him results in death....well, that's the risk of being an assailant.
PA now has Castle Doctrine as well. I'm glad they do. One problem in self defense is the perp you're defending yourself from, can sue you. If you carry, or ever expect you may need to defend yourself, know your states' laws concerning self defense.

In the case Dan quotes, the DA prosecuted even though FL law was on the side of the "defendent". Prosecutors with a political agenda don't always follow the laws.

 

[Soundguy]

that's one thing I like about florida castle. it provides civil immunity... perp can't sue you for shooting him, defending yourself, when he attacked you.

soundguy

 

[RoyJackson]

All this talk about permits and guns brings up a question I often have: why do American citizens have to apply for, wait, pay, and carry a permit to exercise a constitutional right?

It's actually a state's rights issue. If your state's Constitution lists the right to bear arms (or words to that effect), you should have a solid foundation for a CCW permit. If the State's Constitution does not list a right to bear arms clause (NYS and NJ don't, IIRC), you're probably SOL.

BTW, this would be a good topic for the "Friendly Politics" forum as it is sure to get political quite quickly...

 

[Soundguy]

All this talk about permits and guns brings up a question I often have: why do American citizens have to apply for, wait, pay, and carry a permit to exercise a constitutional right?

regulational capability... the govt gets to regulate how you exercise your rights. permitting is a form of that regulational control.

soundguy