  In this paper, we explore how, and if, free choice permission (FCP) can be
accepted when we consider deontic conflicts between certain types of
permissions and obligations. As is well known, FCP can license, under some
minimal conditions, the derivation of an indefinite number of permissions. We
discuss this and other drawbacks and present six Hilbert-style classical
deontic systems admitting a guarded version of FCP. The systems that we present
are not too weak from the inferential viewpoint, as far as permission is
concerned, and do not commit to weakening any specific logic for obligations.
