Herald-Tribune:

In testimony Monday before a Senate committee in Tallahassee, Electra Bustle, lobbyist for the Florida Sheriff’s Association, clarified earlier remarks she made on behalf of her client, stating that the sheriffs realize Floridians have both a right to keep and to bear arms.

“The sheriffs in Florida support the Second Amendment, and we encourage law abiding citizens to take full advantage of their right to keep and bear arms.  I wanna take just a few minutes to clarify some remarks I made in the House committee,” Bustle said. “I tried to make a distinction between the right to own and bear firearms, and distinguish that from a concealed weapons permit, and unfortunately I used words that created a sound byte that now has muddied up the water.”

Bustle’s comments were made before the Senate Military Affairs, Space and Domestic Security Committee, which debated and then passed SB 296, a bill that allows Floridians to carry firearms during a declared emergency and mandatory evacuation.

In previous testimony before the House committee, Bustle told the lawmakers that “there is a difference between owning a firearm and carrying one concealed on your person. Owning a firearm is a right. Carrying concealed is a privilege, and it is a privilege that is earned by showing a higher degree of training and proficiency with a firearm.”

Bustle’s previous comments set off a firestorm of controversy, especially amongst the state’s 7 million gun owners.

“The only thing I was trying to say in the House committee, was there is a distinction in Florida,” Bustle said Monday. “We absolutely have the right, and the sheriff’s support the right, to own and carry firearms, but in Florida, we are a concealed weapons licensed state, and as a result there are certain eligibility requirements required of people who want to carry concealed.”

This is rich.  So she said that there is a distinction between the right to bear arms and the privilege to carry them with you based on approval by the CLEO.  Then in order to “clarify” her wording, she said, there is a distinction between the right to bear arms and the privilege to carry them with you based on approval by the CLEO.  There’s nothing like muddying the waters and then repeating yourself thus muddying the waters.

Here’s the deal.  The waters aren’t muddied.  She said what the CLEOs think, and they think what she said.  She didn’t make a mistake either time.  The CLEOs continue to believe that they are “the only ones,” that special fraternity approved to be in charge of others.  But it goes beyond that.

When I took my concealed handgun permit class, I was already an experienced shooter, and was appalled at the horrible mismanagement of firearms by attendees.  Muzzle flagging and lack of trigger discipline were the order of the day.

It wasn’t like that in Colonial days, where men were required to bring their weapons to church and practice with them along with their families.  But do folks learn the lessons fairly well in lieu of the classes, or does weapons mismanagement cause untold deaths?

Well, let’s turn to Arizona where a law passed in 2010 recognized constitutional carry.  If these concealed handgun courses were so damned valuable, one would expect that the murder and negligent homicide rates would have skyrocketed after passage of the law.

They didn’t.  Turning to Arizona’s statistics (they included negligent and accidental homicide in murder), the numbers run like this: 2006 (462), 2007 (464), 2008 (404), 2009 (317), 2010 (343), 2011 (339), and 2012 (345).

Now let me explain in just a few words what this is really all about.  Revenue.  That’s right.  Money for the permits, financing expensive military toys and bloated salaries for LEOs.