A Pandora’s Box of Training Gaps
Florida Concealed Carry Gun Laws: The training gaps that armed citizens often miss about shooting skill, tactics, legal judgment, and the emotional aftermath of using deadly force.
A Wrong Driveway, A Fatal Shot,
And A Training Failure
Florida concealed carry gun laws may tell you whether you can carry a firearm. They do not tell you whether you are trained to use that firearm lawfully, safely, and effectively. That difference can decide whether a gun saves lives or destroys them.
Kaylin Gillis did not attack Kevin Monahan. She did not break into his home. Nor did she threaten him with a weapon. She was a passenger in a vehicle that mistakenly entered Monahan’s driveway in rural New York. The group was reportedly looking for a party. After realizing the mistake, the vehicles began to leave. [1]
At that point, the danger should have ended. Instead, Monahan fired from his porch. One shotgun blast missed. A second shotgun blast struck Kaylin Gillis. She was twenty years old when a wrong driveway became a deadly-force tragedy. [1]
This case shows what can happen when suspicion replaces professional training. Monahan was convicted of murder and sentenced to decades in prison. A civil lawsuit followed. Kaylin Gillis lost her life. Her family was permanently changed. [1]
Florida Concealed Carry Gun Laws
Do Not Create Judgment
Florida concealed carry gun laws can answer one narrow question. Can a person lawfully carry a concealed firearm? That question matters. However, it does not answer the harder question. Are you trained to use that firearm lawfully, safely, and effectively?
The Monahan case illustrates that difference clearly. Trespass is not automatically a deadly-force event. A wrong driveway is not an execution warrant. Suspicion is not legal justification. Anger is not legal justification. Fear is not always legal justification.
More importantly, the appellate court noted that the vehicles were leaving and posed no threat. That fact cuts through every excuse. A professionally trained armed citizen should understand that leaving vehicles change the deadly-force equation. [1]
Once the bullet leaves the muzzle, you cannot call it back. Even if the threat is real, the bullet still belongs to the shooter. When the threat is not real, the consequences can become catastrophic.
The Second Amendment
Deserves Professional Training
I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. However, I also believe the average person requires professional training. That is true for anyone who controls a tool that can cause death. Drivers need training. Pilots need training. Heavy-equipment operators need training. Armed citizens need training too.
That statement is not anti-gun. It is pro-responsibility. The right to keep and bear arms is one issue. Being taught to use a firearm correctly is another issue.
When the Second Amendment was written, life was different. Many people grew up around firearms. Families often hunted for food. Firearms were common tools of daily life. Children often learned gun handling from parents, relatives, and necessity.
That is not how most people live today. Many people buy their first firearm as adults. Some take one short class, get a permit, or rely on constitutional carry. Then they assume they are ready.
A Permit Is Not Professional Training
Professional training is not the same as advice from a dad, best friend, neighbor, or another untrained shooter. Family experience can be helpful. Informal practice can build comfort. However, comfort is not the same as lawful defensive competence.
A person may learn how to load, aim, and fire from a relative. That does not mean he understands deadly-force law. It does not mean she understands threat recognition, use of cover, emotional control, or civil liability.
Florida concealed carry gun laws do not teach those things either. A statute may define who can carry. It may describe when force is justified. Still, the statute does not train the mind, hands, or emotions under stress.
Monahan’s case is the first warning. He had a gun, he had property and he had suspicion. What he apparently lacked was professional training that separates irritation from imminent danger.
Florida Law Uses Courtroom Words
Florida law allows some people to carry a concealed firearm without a license. The statute allows concealed carry by a licensed person. It also allows unlicensed carry by a person who otherwise meets listed license criteria. [2]
However, Florida concealed carry gun laws do not teach deadly-force judgment. They do not teach emotional control. Nor do they teach a person how to explain a split-second decision to investigators, prosecutors, civil attorneys, or a jury.
Florida’s deadly-force statute uses serious legal language. A person must reasonably believe deadly force is necessary to prevent imminent death, great bodily harm, or an imminent forcible felony. [3]
Those words matter. They are not range words. They are courtroom words. Professional training helps students understand those words in real situations. Without that training, a person may confuse fear, anger, or pride with legal justification.
The Ocala Case: A Closed Door And A Fatal Decision
Susan Lorincz shot Ajike “A.J.” Owens in Ocala, Florida. Owens was outside Lorincz’s closed door after a dispute involving Owens’ children. Lorincz fired through the door and claimed self-defense. A jury convicted her of manslaughter with a firearm. [4]
Lorincz later received a 25-year prison sentence. Reports stated that the judge emphasized she was in a safe position. She had already called law enforcement. That fact matters because professional training teaches time, distance, barriers, and alternatives. [4]
A closed door changes the tactical picture. Prior conflict changes how investigators view the event. Anger can poison a self-defense claim. What happened before the shot may become just as important as the shot itself.
This case is local to Ocala. It also shows why self-defense law must be broached in any class where self-defense is the reason for training. Safe gun handling is essential. Marksmanship is essential. Legal judgment is essential too.
Florida Home Protection Law Has Limits
Florida’s home-protection statute includes important protections. However, it also includes conditions, presumptions, and exceptions. That means the facts still matter. A slogan does not decide whether a shooting was justified. [5]
The Lorincz case illustrates that point. A person may believe she is protected by self-defense law. Prosecutors, judges, and juries may see the facts differently. That gap can become the difference between freedom and prison.
Professional training should help students understand that gap. It should not make them aggressive. Instead, it should make them more careful. It should teach them to ask whether deadly force is legally necessary.
Florida concealed carry gun laws are only one part of the problem. The larger issue is whether the armed citizen understands force, threat, necessity, and restraint before the gun appears.
The Wrong Doorbell Case: Fear Is Not Enough
Ralph Yarl was a teenager in Kansas City, Missouri. He mistakenly rang the wrong doorbell while trying to pick up his siblings. Andrew Lester shot him through the door. Yarl survived, but he suffered serious injuries. [6]
Lester later pleaded guilty to second-degree assault. His case shows another common training gap. The armed person treated confusion as if it were an immediate deadly-force threat. Fear, without professional training, can become dangerous. [6]
These cases differ in important ways. Still, they share one obvious warning. The armed person treated confusion, fear, irritation, or assumption as if it were a deadly-force event.
That is not the kind of judgment most people learn from casual shooting. It is not the same as target practice. A person can shoot well and still make a disastrous legal decision.
The Hard-Skills Gap: The Bullet Still Belongs To You
Kenneth Santana-Rodriguez faced a different problem. He reportedly claimed he fired at an armed threat in a Massachusetts nail salon. However, an innocent employee was killed. The case raised a painful legal question about bystanders struck during claimed self-defense shootings. [7]
This case shows why hard skills matter. Defensive shooting is not just hitting a target. It includes target identification, muzzle control, trigger control, movement, and backstop awareness. More importantly, it includes knowing when a shot is too dangerous.
A paper target does not rush you. It does not scream. Nor does it stand beside an innocent person. Real violence may happen in poor light, at close distance, near family members, or in a crowded public place.
Therefore, Florida concealed carry gun laws permit training classes should not be treated as a substitute for serious skill development. The law may allow you to carry. It does not give you recoil control, trigger discipline, retention skills, or judgment under pressure.
Bystanders, Civil Lawsuits, And Financial Ruin
The Santana-Rodriguez case also points to a larger issue. Innocent bystanders have been killed in claimed self-defense shootings. Some shooters may avoid major criminal liability. Yet grieving families may still seek accountability through civil lawsuits. [7]
That matters to every armed citizen. Criminal law is not the only risk. A person may avoid prison and still face financial ruin. Attorney fees, expert witnesses, lost income, insurance disputes, and civil damages can devastate a family.
Professional training teaches students to think beyond the immediate threat. Who is behind the attacker? Who is beside the attacker? Could the bullet pass through? Will someone move into the line of fire?
These questions are tactical. Later, they may become legal questions. Afterward, they may be asked by investigators, prosecutors, plaintiff’s attorneys, insurance companies, and jurors.
Jack Wilson: Professional Training Under Pressure
Jack Wilson provides the positive contrast. He stopped the West Freeway Church of Christ attacker in Texas. The attacker had already killed two people. Wilson fired the decisive shot and ended the attack within seconds. [8]
However, this case should never be reduced to “a good guy with a gun.” Wilson was not merely carrying a firearm. He was a firearms instructor who trained hard and had proven skills. He was also a former reserve deputy sheriff. In addition, he led the church’s volunteer security team. [8]
His case demonstrates professional training, not casual gun ownership. Becoming an instructor takes substantial professional training. It also requires discipline, repetition, judgment, and the ability to teach others safely.
Reports state that several other armed people drew weapons, but only Wilson fired. That detail may be the most important lesson. Professional training is not only about pulling the trigger. Sometimes it means knowing when not to fire. [8]
Professional Training Means
Knowing When Not To Shoot
Wilson’s case illustrates the value of professional training in another way. He acted when the threat was clear. Other armed people did not add unnecessary gunfire. That matters because a room full of armed people can become dangerous without discipline.
A person who carries a gun must understand timing, angles, and target isolation. He must know whether innocent people are in the line of fire. She must know whether movement creates a better solution than shooting.
Professional training develops the ability to think based on knowledge, not emotion. It connects the hands, eyes, brain, and law. Without that connection, a gun owner may focus only on the firearm. That is when tactics, judgment, and legal boundaries can disappear.
Florida concealed carry gun laws may let a person carry a firearm in public. But, professional training helps that person decide whether drawing it is lawful, tactically wise, or dangerously premature.
The Property-Crime Trap
Orest Schur’s case adds another warning. Schur, a former U.S. Space Force sergeant, confronted teens during an attempted car break-in in Colorado. Prosecutors said the teens were unarmed. Schur chased them and fired multiple rounds. [9]
One teen died, and another was wounded. Schur claimed self-defense. The court did not accept that claim. He was convicted of second-degree murder and attempted murder. The judge sentenced him to 54 years in prison. [9]
This case matters because Schur was not simply an inexperienced person. He had a formal background. Nevertheless, a formal background is not the same as professional self-defense firearms training, which must include gun law training. The difference can be enormous.
Property crimes feel personal. They create anger and adrenaline. However, anger over property does not justify deadly force. Professional training must teach that distinction before the car alarm, broken window, or late-night surprise occurs.
Emotional Control Is A Training Issue
The Monahan, Lorincz, Lester, and Schur cases all involve different facts. Yet each one illustrates a lack of professional training in decision-making. The shooter treated fear, anger, property, confusion, or suspicion as something larger than the law allowed.
Guns do not mix well with anger. They do not mix well with ego. Panic can also create serious danger. A person carrying a gun must be calmer than everyone else. That is not a slogan. It is a practical requirement.
Professional training teaches emotional discipline. The gun should not make you braver in arguments. Instead, it should make you more careful. It should not make you more willing to confront. Rather, it should make you more willing to avoid trouble.
That lesson is difficult to learn from an untrained shooter. A dad, friend, or neighbor may mean well. However, good intentions do not replace structured training in law, tactics, and judgment.
The Aftermath Gap
Most people imagine the shooting. They do not imagine what follows. They do not imagine handcuffs, questioning, attorney fees, seized firearms, news coverage, online attacks, or civil litigation.
Even a justified shooting can leave scars. A person may shake afterward. Memory may be incomplete. Sleep may suffer. Family members may struggle. The shooter may face guilt, fear, confusion, or anger.
The Lorincz and Owens case shows that families carry the damage. Owens’ children were left without their mother. Reports described severe trauma to those children. The sentencing judge also cited the trauma inflicted on them. [4]
Professional training should include aftermath preparation. Students should understand that the fight does not end with the last shot. Police response, legal counsel, family contact, media attention, and civil liability may follow. And, that following can persist for years, and sometimes a lifetime.
What Defensive Firearms Training Should Include
Real defensive firearms training should cover more than shooting. It should begin with safety and marksmanship. However, it should not end there. If self-defense is the reason for training, self-defense law must be part of the class.
Training should include threat recognition, pre-attack indicators, movement, cover, and verbal commands. It should explain when not to draw. In addition, it should cover shooting from retention, low-light problems, and decision-making under stress.
Scenario-based work is especially important. Static range drills can build fundamentals. However, scenarios test judgment. They force students to decide, not just shoot. Should you move? Should you speak? Is the threat real? Is the threat immediate?
Professional training also teaches humility. No one is immune to panic. No one is immune to tunnel vision. Nobody is above the law. The goal is not to create aggressive gun carriers. The goal is to create safer armed citizens.
Florida Concealed Carry Gun Laws
Are Only The Beginning
A permit may satisfy the state. Constitutional carry may satisfy the law. Neither one proves competence, judgment or restraint. Also, neither one proves tactical understanding, emotional readiness, or legal knowledge.
That is the training gap. Florida concealed carry gun laws may let a person carry, but they do not make the person prepared. The gap can be dangerous. It can be deadly. It can also be expensive.
Carrying a gun is a serious decision. Therefore, it should lead to serious professional training. The question is not only whether Florida law allows you to carry. The better question is whether you are prepared for what carrying actually means.
Before you carry a gun, ask the harder question. Not simply, “Can I carry?” Instead, ask, “Am I truly prepared for what comes next?”
Why This Guidance Is Credible
This article was written by Alan B. Densky, founder and chief instructor of CCW Training Academy. Alan is a former deputy sheriff and NRA Certified Instructor.
His NRA certifications include Pistol, Nationwide CCW, Home Firearms Safety, and Range Safety Officer. Pictures of NRA and law enforcement credentials are available on Alan’s biography page.
Alan has 25 years of mixed martial arts training. He also specializes in scenario-based defensive firearms training, threat recognition, decision-making, and safe gun handling for responsible adults.
CCW Training Academy is a BBB Accredited Business. Training is calm, patient, structured, and practical. Students are never rushed or embarrassed. They are steadily developed into safer, more highly skilled shooters.
Defensive Firearms Training In North Central Florida
CCW Training Academy trains responsible armed citizens in North Central Florida. The Academy serves Ocala, Leesburg, The Villages, Summerfield, and nearby communities.
Training covers more than marksmanship. Students learn safety, legal concepts, threat recognition, decision-making, and scenario-based self-defense. They also learn why drawing a gun is never casual.
Private instruction and in-home training are also available. In-home training uses recoil-enabled training pistols and a computerized target system. This allows safe, realistic work inside the environment students may actually need to defend.
The Second Amendment protects an important right. That right deserves responsible citizens. The law may allow you to carry. Professional training helps prepare you to carry wisely.
View Firearms Training Options
Sources And Citation Map
- [1] Kevin Monahan and Kaylin Gillis wrong-driveway shooting, conviction, appeal, and civil lawsuit.
Times Union - [2] Florida Statute 790.01, carrying concealed weapons and firearms.
Florida Legislature - [3] Florida Statute 776.012, use or threatened use of force.
Florida Legislature - [4] Susan Lorincz and Ajike Owens Ocala shooting, conviction, sentencing, and aftermath.
People - [5] Florida Statute 776.013, home protection, presumptions, and exceptions.
Florida Legislature - [6] Andrew Lester and Ralph Yarl wrong-doorbell shooting.
Associated Press - [7] Kenneth Santana-Rodriguez and innocent bystanders in claimed self-defense shootings.
The Wall Street Journal - [8] Jack Wilson and the West Freeway Church of Christ shooting.
Axios - [9] Orest Schur property-crime shooting case.
New York Post
