America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 4 weeks ago by Sunoverbeach. 48 replies replies.
Florida CCW
MACS Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 76,492
Went to the Tax Collector's office October 27th to apply for my CCW. Had my Florida license, my DD-214 and that was it. Sat down at a computer to fill out, I think, 3 pages of questions and name/address/etc... electronically signed it, scanned the DD-214 and clicked submit. Sat down for a picture, paid the fee, and was out.

Got my CCW in the mail on the 1st. Literally less than a week from application to "Here's your CCW, welcome to Florida, enjoy your frankin' FREEDOM!"
8trackdisco Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 57,594
MACS wrote:
Went to the Tax Collector's office October 27th to apply for my CCW. Had my Florida license, my DD-214 and that was it. Sat down at a computer to fill out, I think, 3 pages of questions and name/address/etc... electronically signed it, scanned the DD-214 and clicked submit. Sat down for a picture, paid the fee, and was out.

Got my CCW in the mail on the 1st. Literally less than a week from application to "Here's your CCW, welcome to Florida, enjoy your frankin' FREEDOM!"


Merica!
Mr. Jones Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 17,418
That's fast!

Good for you.

Every state should be so easy...in Pa it takes at least 30-60 days after handing in all the paperwork and the $$ fee in person...you have to list 2? People to vouch for your good intentions, mental status and the need for the permit....

It is not as easy as what you just described...
MACS Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 76,492
Mr. Jones wrote:
That's fast!

Good for you.

Every state should be so easy...in Pa it takes at least 30-60 days after handing in all the paperwork and the $$ fee in person...you have to list 2? People to vouch for your good intentions, mental status and the need for the permit....

It is not as easy as what you just described...


Amendment #2: "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

What you just described is 100% infringement and is a violation of our 2nd amendment right. Much like state laws in CA, NY, etc...
8trackdisco Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 57,594
MACS wrote:
Amendment #2: "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

What you just described is 100% infringement and is a violation of our 2nd amendment right. Much like state laws in CA, NY, etc...


And why haven't these laws been challenged to the supreme court?
Gene363 Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 28,783
MACS wrote:
Went to the Tax Collector's office October 27th to apply for my CCW. Had my Florida license, my DD-214 and that was it. Sat down at a computer to fill out, I think, 3 pages of questions and name/address/etc... electronically signed it, scanned the DD-214 and clicked submit. Sat down for a picture, paid the fee, and was out.

Got my CCW in the mail on the 1st. Literally less than a week from application to "Here's your CCW, welcome to Florida, enjoy your frankin' FREEDOM!"



Freedom!
frankj1 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 42,729
MACS wrote:
Amendment #2: "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."



just for the record:


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
steve02 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 05-20-2004
Posts: 952
Mr. Jones wrote:
That's fast!

Good for you.

Every state should be so easy...in Pa it takes at least 30-60 days after handing in all the paperwork and the $$ fee in person...you have to list 2? People to vouch for your good intentions, mental status and the need for the permit....

It is not as easy as what you just described...


PA is easier than FL.
Stogie1020 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 12-19-2019
Posts: 3,715
Az ftw. No permit needed to ccw.
tonygraz Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 18,839
frankj1 wrote:
just for the record:


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Important to read the whole amendment. Better than picking parts out of context to fool the weak minded.
ZRX1200 Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 58,009
Yeah and ignore historical context of the language to suit your tastes….try harder buddy
Sunoverbeach Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 13,235
IN took about two weeks to receive, but otherwise similar process. I wasn't displeased.


Frankie, let's break down that sentence real quick here. What you have is a prefatory clause, "A well regulated militia....," and an operative clause, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Note that the preface can't stand on its own as a statement, whereas the subject portion of the statement very much can. So it's a really an example of what an armed individual can do as opposed to a restriction against why they should be armed. Without the armed individual, there is no ability to raise a militia, should it be needed.

Not my work, for the record. Simply paraphrased SC interpretation. Makes sense to me though.
ZRX1200 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 58,009
SCOTUS is only the ultimate arbiter when the results are acceptable.

Where is Robert?
HockeyDad Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 44,253
MACS wrote:
Amendment #2: "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

What you just described is 100% infringement and is a violation of our 2nd amendment right. Much like state laws in CA, NY, etc...


In my county in California….we infringe! Already ruled unconstitutional.

It is impossible to get a CCW in my county.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 13,235
Hang in there. Your new county has a different take on this issue
HockeyDad Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 44,253
Sunoverbeach wrote:
Hang in there. Your new county has a different take on this issue


I cross the CA - AZ border tomorrow.

If i was staying here I would have applied and then been summarily rejected and sued. Just for fun!
MACS Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 76,492
8trackdisco wrote:
And why haven't these laws been challenged to the supreme court?


It has. People in NY brought it before the SCOTUS and it was, in fact, ruled unconstitutional.
MACS Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 76,492
tonygraz wrote:
Important to read the whole amendment. Better than picking parts out of context to fool the weak minded.


See if your weak mind can follow along, Tony. I'll type r e a l s l o w.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." There's the entire text. I highlighted the important part.

Now... do you think that requiring a permit is the same as "asking permission"? (This is a softball, pal... spoiler... it is!)

And if our right to own and carry shall not be infringed... don'tcha think making us ask permission to exercise a right is infringement? (another softball, buddy... you got this one!)
DrafterX Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 96,600
Tony is one of them disinformation spreader dudes... and unfortunately some poor bassard might believe him... Mellow
deadeyedick Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 03-13-2003
Posts: 15,042
Stogie1020 wrote:
Az ftw. No permit needed to ccw.


Help me out here cuz I don't see too good sometimes. Where does the 2nd amendment say anything about a permit?
MACS Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 76,492
deadeyedick wrote:
Help me out here cuz I don't see too good sometimes. Where does the 2nd amendment say anything about a permit?


It does not... and AZ does it 100% right. Your permit IS the 2nd amendment.
burning_sticks Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 08-17-2020
Posts: 60
Stogie1020 wrote:
Az ftw. No permit needed to ccw.

Constitutional carry in Missouri or you can get a permit, if you think the government need records.
dkeage Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 03-05-2004
Posts: 14,551
MACS wrote:
It does not... and AZ does it 100% right. Your permit IS the 2nd amendment.

Texas too as of last year
DrMaddVibe Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 52,903
Can we get nationwide reciprocity?

Run that down the SCOTUS!
HockeyDad Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 44,253
Sunoverbeach wrote:
Hang in there. Your new county has a different take on this issue


Step 1: 11 page application

In accordance with law and the opinion of the Contra Costa County Counsel, applicants are not required to provide information justifying "good cause" for a permit application. (This was ruled unconstitutional in New York)

Step 2: fingerprints

Step 3: Background Investigation/Interview

The purpose of a background investigation is to determine an applicant’s qualification and establish some reasonable expectation of suitability for a CCW. In some cases psychological testing may be required.

Upon completion of the FBI, DOJ clearance, and background check all eligible applicants will be required to have a face to face interview to review and verify their signatures on the application.

Upon completion of the interview, the application package will be reviewed by the Sheriff for consideration for the issuance of a CCW.

Step 4: Step Four Weapons/Range Qualification and Training



This is how we infringe. Nobody makes it through the interview. If you think you need a CCW, you need a psych evaluation! Game over.
RiverRatRuss Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 09-02-2022
Posts: 339
MACS wrote:
Went to the Tax Collector's office October 27th to apply for my CCW. Had my Florida license, my DD-214 and that was it. Sat down at a computer to fill out, I think, 3 pages of questions and name/address/etc... electronically signed it, scanned the DD-214 and clicked submit. Sat down for a picture, paid the fee, and was out.

Got my CCW in the mail on the 1st. Literally less than a week from application to "Here's your CCW, welcome to Florida, enjoy your frankin' FREEDOM!"


Damn, here in Hellinois they take your blood, do a background check of your sphincter, Home inspection like an adoption agency then lose your paperwork just for a FOID card (only State in the Union requiring a FOID BTW... I was fortunate somehow they did not lose my paperwork and got my renewal in 3 weeks, I've got friends who had to pass up hunting seasons because their renewals were over 6 months wait. Same chit with the CCW here... now the State is talking about combining the two. d'oh!
Gene363 Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 28,783
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Can we get nationwide reciprocity?

Run that down the SCOTUS!


However, ONLY, if they use the Arizona criteria for a permit. Anything else allows Federal control over state permits, es no bueno.
rfenst Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 37,178
ZRX1200 wrote:
SCOTUS is only the ultimate arbiter when the results are acceptable.

Where is Robert?

Here, what do you want/need?. Don't you already know all this stuff?
I'll truly help you, if I can...
J&K11 Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 08-20-2021
Posts: 37
In my state as soon as you step foot on our soil you automatically have the right to open or conceal carry whatever weapon you choose no paperwork involved.
tonygraz Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 18,839
MACS wrote:
See if your weak mind can follow along, Tony. I'll type r e a l s l o w.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." There's the entire text. I highlighted the important part.

Now... do you think that requiring a permit is the same as "asking permission"? (This is a softball, pal... spoiler... it is!)

And if our right to own and carry shall not be infringed... don'tcha think making us ask permission to exercise a right is infringement? (another softball, buddy... you got this one!)


Do we need a well regulated militia ? We have an army, a navy, an air force and the national guard. The second amendment is obsolete.
8trackdisco Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 57,594
tonygraz wrote:
Do we need a well regulated militia ? We have an army, a navy, an air force and the national guard. The second amendment is obsolete.


There aren’t any well regulated militias.
A bunch unregulated- which is adding some angst.

If you want to start unraveling amendments, be careful.
All or nothing. You okay going back to slavery and women not voting?

It isn’t a buffet.

Imagine Trump becoming president again. You want him selecting which are obsolete?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 52,903
Frying pan Frying pan Frying pan
MACS Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 76,492
Here's a democrat, Tony... saying the 2nd amendment is relevant and applicable TODAY.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91NP7d6PGPA
HockeyDad Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 44,253
tonygraz wrote:
Do we need a well regulated militia ? We have an army, a navy, an air force and the national guard. The second amendment is obsolete.


I heard that it is Republicans that are a threat to democracy. Turns it’s Tony and the Democrats that are the threat.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 13,235
As I was getting at above, there's too much focus on the militia part. I have a right to defend my life should I have the need to do so. I have a right to use whatever gives me the best advantage in that situation. Nobody has the right to deny me that right.


"Right of the people" is also stated in the 1st and 4th amendments. Why is it nobody wants to infringe on those?
BuckyB93 Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 12,823
Verbatim from the 2nd Amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The people. This is a key point. You can massage it all you want with bull$hit like "they were talking about just muskets and stuff."

No they weren't. They wanted citizens to have a right to defend themselves against a tyrannical government and personal harm. Throughout history governments have used soldiers to oppress people. This is what the 2nd Amendment tries to prevent.

The fact is, the 2nd Amendment is in place empower the people and to keep the government in check if it comes to an armed conflict. It also makes a foreign country that might want to invade the US, think twice.

Here's a cut and past from an article published last year after deer hunting season that makes some great points.

"There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin .... Allow me to restate that number: 600,000!

Over the last several months, Wisconsin's hunters became the eighth largest army in the world.

(That’s more men under arms than in Iran .. More than France and Germany combined.)

These men, deployed to the woods of a single American state, Wisconsin, to hunt with firearms, And NO ONE WAS KILLED.

That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigan's 700,000 hunters, ALL OF WHOM HAVE RETURNED HOME SAFELY.

Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally establishes the fact that the Hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world.

And then add in the total number of hunters in the other 46 states. It's millions more.

The point?

America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of home-grown firepower! Hunting... it's not just a way to fill the freezer.

It's a matter of national security.

That's why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed.

Food for thought, when next we consider gun control. Overall it's true, so if we disregard some assumptions that hunters don't possess the same skills as soldiers, the question would still remain... What army of 2 million would want to face 30 million, 40 million, or 50 million armed citizens??? For the sake of our freedom, don't ever allow gun control or confiscation of guns.

(If you agree, as I do, pass it on, I feel good that I have an army of millions who would protect our land and I sure don't want the government taking control of the possession of firearms)

AMERICA! Designed by geniuses, Run by idiots!"


http://www.onwisconsinoutdoors.com/Firearms/AMERICAS-HUNTERS--Pretty-Amazing
frankj1 Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 42,729
Sunoverbeach wrote:
IN took about two weeks to receive, but otherwise similar process. I wasn't displeased.


Frankie, let's break down that sentence real quick here. What you have is a prefatory clause, "A well regulated militia....," and an operative clause, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Note that the preface can't stand on its own as a statement, whereas the subject portion of the statement very much can. So it's a really an example of what an armed individual can do as opposed to a restriction against why they should be armed. Without the armed individual, there is no ability to raise a militia, should it be needed.

Not my work, for the record. Simply paraphrased SC interpretation. Makes sense to me though.

wasn't ignoring ya, just didn't want to lead the thread down that path...but your interpretation is more than reasonable and sensible.

I think the unsaid clause..."being necessary to the security of a free State"...makes all opinions plausible and I actually appreciate that it seems to deny absolute original word interpretations.

As it happens, though, I come out of all that believing in the right to bear arms.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 13,235
Wasn't positive how you meant it, but read it in a negative context and acted on it.

I've always respected you for more than just your film career
frankj1 Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 42,729
Sunoverbeach wrote:
Wasn't positive how you meant it, but read it in a negative context and acted on it.

I've always respected you for more than just your film career

it's the most respectful thing on my life's resume...
ZRX1200 Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 58,009
Thanks Robert, just wanted to make sure the Fenster Signal still worked!

I’m relieved.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 52,903
HockeyDad wrote:
I heard that it is Republicans that are a threat to democracy. Turns it’s Tony and the Democrats that are the threat.



I keep saying the DNC is a terrorist organization. Not my fault the coin dropped today.
RiverRatRuss Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 09-02-2022
Posts: 339
BuckyB93 wrote:
Verbatim from the 2nd Amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The people. This is a key point. You can massage it all you want with bull$hit like "they were talking about just muskets and stuff."

No they weren't. They wanted citizens to have a right to defend themselves against a tyrannical government and personal harm. Throughout history governments have used soldiers to oppress people. This is what the 2nd Amendment tries to prevent.

The fact is, the 2nd Amendment is in place empower the people and to keep the government in check if it comes to an armed conflict. It also makes a foreign country that might want to invade the US, think twice.

Here's a cut and past from an article published last year after deer hunting season that makes some great points.

"There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin .... Allow me to restate that number: 600,000!

Over the last several months, Wisconsin's hunters became the eighth largest army in the world.

(That’s more men under arms than in Iran .. More than France and Germany combined.)

These men, deployed to the woods of a single American state, Wisconsin, to hunt with firearms, And NO ONE WAS KILLED.

That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigan's 700,000 hunters, ALL OF WHOM HAVE RETURNED HOME SAFELY.

Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally establishes the fact that the Hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world.

And then add in the total number of hunters in the other 46 states. It's millions more.

The point?

America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of home-grown firepower! Hunting... it's not just a way to fill the freezer.

It's a matter of national security.

That's why all enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed.

Food for thought, when next we consider gun control. Overall it's true, so if we disregard some assumptions that hunters don't possess the same skills as soldiers, the question would still remain... What army of 2 million would want to face 30 million, 40 million, or 50 million armed citizens??? For the sake of our freedom, don't ever allow gun control or confiscation of guns.

(If you agree, as I do, pass it on, I feel good that I have an army of millions who would protect our land and I sure don't want the government taking control of the possession of firearms)

AMERICA! Designed by geniuses, Run by idiots!"


http://www.onwisconsinoutdoors.com/Firearms/AMERICAS-HUNTERS--Pretty-Amazing



Very good read thanks Bucky... I went to your link and shared it on FB and instantly the FB Fact Checkers jumped my post with this BullChit!!!
_______________________________________________

We added a notice to your post
The post includes information that independent fact-checkers said was false.
Partly false information in a post that you shared
You shared a photo.
Nov 3, 2022
Independent fact-checkers reviewed a similar photo and said it was partly false.
Jun 6, 2022
Facebook determined your post has the same partly false photo and added a notice to the post.
People who repeatedly share false information might have their posts moved lower in News Feed so other people are less likely to see them.
From independent fact-checkers
PolitiFact - Deer licenses sold in Wisconsin don't prove the state has one of the world’s largest militaries
PolitiFact
FACT CHECK: Viral Post Inaccurately Describes Size Of Hunting Population In Wisconsin
Check Your Fact
______________________________________________________

I didn't submit a photo? I shared your link... d'oh! these COMMIE BASTAGES!!!!
tonygraz Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 18,839
So is it safe to walk in the Wisconsin woods ?
8trackdisco Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 57,594
tonygraz wrote:
So is it safe to walk in the Wisconsin woods ?


……. Of course. Gonz
MACS Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 76,492
8trackdisco wrote:
……. Of course. Gonz


Depends... you got antlers? Then I'd say no... no it is not.
8trackdisco Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 57,594
MACS wrote:
Depends... you got antlers? Then I'd say no... no it is not.


Guns, bears, Meth labs…. It could go wrong.
Mike3316 Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 02-05-2022
Posts: 327
I got a FL CCW and it took about 2 1/2 weeks. I just got my NJ CCW (yes you read that correctly.... NJ). THAT took me just about 3 MONTHS!!!!
Sunoverbeach Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 13,235
Sounds quick for NJ
Users browsing this topic
Guest