Which statute states that it is not a violation to carry, for purposes of lawful self-defense in a concealed manner, a dart-firing stun gun?

Which statute states that it is not a violation to carry, for purposes of lawful self-defense in a concealed manner, a dart-firing stun gun?

• A. 790.01(3)(b)
• B. 790.053(2)(b)
• C. 790.25
• D. 790.115

Answer: (A)

In Florida, how a device is defined determines whether it’s treated as a weapon for the purposes of carry laws. The statute in question explicitly defines a dart-firing stun gun and, importantly, says it is not a weapon. That definitional carve-out means carrying such a device concealed for lawful self-defense isn’t covered by the concealed-weapon restrictions that apply to real weapons. So, this statute directly authorizes the idea that you can carry a dart-firing stun gun in a concealed manner for self-defense without it counting as a violation. The other statutes don’t provide this same explicit exception. They deal with carrying concealed weapons or the use of force in self-defense in broader terms, but without the specific definition that removes a dart-firing stun gun from the category of “weapon.” That’s why the statute that defines the device as not a weapon is the correct one.

In Florida, how a device is defined determines whether it’s treated as a weapon for the purposes of carry laws. The statute in question explicitly defines a dart-firing stun gun and, importantly, says it is not a weapon. That definitional carve-out means carrying such a device concealed for lawful self-defense isn’t covered by the concealed-weapon restrictions that apply to real weapons. So, this statute directly authorizes the idea that you can carry a dart-firing stun gun in a concealed manner for self-defense without it counting as a violation.

The other statutes don’t provide this same explicit exception. They deal with carrying concealed weapons or the use of force in self-defense in broader terms, but without the specific definition that removes a dart-firing stun gun from the category of “weapon.” That’s why the statute that defines the device as not a weapon is the correct one.