The Palm Beach Post published an opinion piece on September 18, 2025. While the Post says the article is only the authors’ opinion, this correspondent could not find any mention of who the authors were.
The authors show they lack significant information about open carry. A couple of years ago, as of 2022, only four states prohibited the general open carry of modern handguns. They were California, Florida, Illinois, and New York. As the divide between the states following Supreme Court decisions on the Second Amendment widened after the Bruen decision in 2022, New Jersey made it illegal to open carry with a permit. Connecticut and Maryland banned the general open carry of handguns in 2023, even with a permit, for self-defense. There are now six states that ban the general open carry of modern handguns in public for self-defense.
Thus, lawful open carry of handguns is not a crime in 44 states, not 47. From the Palmbeachpost.com:
Let’s be clear. Lawful open carry is not a crime in the 47 states that allow some form of it, and that now includes Florida. Only California, Illinois and New York still prohibit open carry. While some gun enthusiasts may wonder what took Florida so long, the rest of state residents will have to adjust to a major change in law that came with little fanfare.
The legislature in Florida has been heavily debating the subject for many years. I would not call that “without fanfare”. The authors make a good point about the current law requiring gun carriers to act responsibly.
No one expects to now see an outpouring of gun-toting Second Amendment enthusiasts parading their hardware in Boca Raton’s Mizner Park or along West Palm Beach’s Clematis Avenue. The state still provides ample legal protection for property owners to prohibit firearms from their property and law enforcement to continue to police those who exhibit firearms in a “rude, careless, angry or threatening manner in public,” Uthmeier wrote in a memo to police.
Then the authors attempt to rewrite history. Open carry in Florida is not a new right. It was only banned, in general, in 1987, 90 years after the law was passed requiring gun carriers to be responsible. The statute, 790.10, was passed in 1897 with a few changes since:
790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms.—If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
The authors of the Post article claim open carry is a”new right”. It is not. They should have used the term recently restored, not “new-found”.
Now that open carry is the law, gun owners, Second Amendment enthusiasts, along with state and local governments will have to step up to ensure that this new-found freedom isn’t abused. New rights require greater responsibility.
This is part of the Left’s attempt to ignore most history. Second Amendment rights are not “new rights.” They have not been created recently. They are being restored after severe infringements lasting for more than a hundred years in most states.
Most of the infringements happened after the Civil War, as legislatures worried about freed slaves having access to arms or trying to reduce the dueling culture. Most of those restrictions were on concealed carry. Kentucky was one of the first to ban concealed carry in 1813. The state supreme court ruled in 1822 that the ban violated the Kentucky State Constitution. Here is a small excerpt from that opinion:
But to be in conflict with the constitution, it is not essential that the act should contain a prohibition against bearing arms in every possible form–it is the right to bear arms in defence of the citizens and the state, that is secured by the constitution, and whatever restrains the full and complete exercise of that right, though not an entire destruction of it, is forbidden by the explicit language of the constitution.
This stayed in effect until 1850, when Kentucky changed the state constitution to allow the legislature to ban the carry of concealed weapons. Almost all of the state infringements on the carry of arms happened after the Supreme Court ruled the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states in 1833. This was reversed after the Civil War, with the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Supreme Court refused to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment on the states until the court adopted the partial “incorporation” doctrine, which held rights had to be “incorporated” into the Constitution, against the states, by the Supreme Court. About a hundred years later, the Supreme Court incorporated the Second Amendment into the Constitution with the decision in McDonald v City of Chicago.
This correspondent has openly carried holstered handguns in public for thousands of hours, in several states. The Post authors imply that open carriers often abuse their right to carry. It is a false premise.
Most people do not even notice that a person is openly carrying. Most of the rest pretend not to notice. A few assume the person openly carrying is a law officer of some type. The response to open carry as political speech is applauded by most people. Very, very few find open carry offensive.
There is no “right to not be offended” in the Constitution. Open carry is not just protected by the Second Amendment, it should also be protected by the First as symbolic, powerful, political speech.
Open Carry of Firearms is Strong, Protected, Political, Symbolic Speech
Florida Appeals Court Strikes Down Open Carry Ban in Major Second Amendment Victory
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
They always brace for this huge open carry tidal wave that never happens irrespective of where this policy is applied. Frankly, everybody still prefers the privacy of concealed even if it requires a permission slip. But the only practical benefit with open carry is that at least for this one rare instance city hall and their permit clerks are out of your business. Liberals refuse to live in the “wild wild west.”
And open carry, that’s the wild wild west”.
I’d wait for a few more weeks before OC in Florida, an overzealous po-po might not have gotten the memo that OC is now legal.
Great article and salient points. Thank you Dean, you’re a preeminent author and activist.
The only reason I would prefer open carry to CCW is comfort. Wearing the gun in my waste band is a P.I.T.A. for me at least. Otherwise there are compelling reasons, where I live, in communist Broward County FL, such that it makes sense not to advertise. This county is where Progressive Liberal activists who were sliding in the mud at Woodstock, came to die. And need I tell you, they have big mouths that cause trouble. Looking at the cover image on this article, you do realize that to go from open carry to concealed carry just requires draping… Read more »
The funny thing is, now that we can, nobody is; 99.8% are still carrying concealed. I’ve seen a couple of people, but not many.
The best way to change uninformed minds is to show them it works.
HLB
The PB Post has been looking to the left for a number of years. They no longer demonstrate any credibility, and their leadership is mostly limited to people who want “proof” of what they already believe.
You have to love an article attacking another media article then SHOWING SOMEONE OPEN CARRYING A FIREARM WITH A HOLSTER THAT IS TOTALLY UNSAFE FOR OPEN CARRY by having zero retention or safety devices to help prevent snatching. I say that as someone who has fought untold number of suspects and had people touch inadvertently or otherwise could access my firearm. Most shootings for civilians are very close distances and it is not always possible to avoid tight areas with other people… THE IRONY AND BAD OPTICS / ADVICE is just amazing in this article..
I was VP for Communications and Public Relations for the Iowa Firearms Coalition when our successful lobbying efforts at the state capitol changed the state law from “May Issue” subject to the discretion of the Sheriff (99 counties, 99 different standards) to “Shall Issue” subject to disqualification under a uniform but very narrow set of requirements. At that time, the Liberal hew and cry was “There’ll be Wild West shootouts in every town across the state!” to “The gutters will run red with blood.” to “You’ll open the floodgates of murder and police deaths!” – none of which came true.… Read more »
My reading of the court’s decision sure looks like it is “as applied” and not the “facial” ruling that would make open carry legal either throughout the district or the State.