Florida city bans guns for neighborhood watch volunteers.

EMNofSeattle said:

The governor is not the "state" the governor did not create the state in 6 days and rest on the 7th...

the authority for a county or city is made by the legislature.

as to your final question, the following methods are far preferable to a power hungry governor...

>Recall elections
>Criminal conviction BY JURY
>removal by provision allowing city council to fire said official
>Resignation pending above three

I don't think a single official should have the authority to reverse the will of the voters.... the ruling class doesn't need to have supreme powers.

Click to expand...

the authority for a county or city is made by the legislature.

Click to expand...

And this same Legislature (and the Florida Constitution) grants the Governor certain powers and responsibilities.
In certain situations he has nearly unlimited power. Don't like it? Get the Legislature, or the people of Florida, to change it.

>Recall elections

Click to expand...

Recall elections are extremely limited in Florida. Because of the Legislature.

>Criminal conviction BY JURY

Click to expand...

This is already provided for in the powers granted to the Governor in addition to suspension due to Felony arrest. Because of the Florida Legislature.

>removal by provision allowing city council to fire said official

Click to expand...

So you'd rather have the city council be able to fire an elected official?

>Resignation pending above three

Click to expand...

So you rather wait for the criminal to resign rather than the Governor being proactive about it?

eye95 said:

I think the bolded part requires a citation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Click to expand...

790.33
. . .
(2) POLICY AND INTENT.—
(a) It is the intent of this section to provide uniform firearms laws in the state; to declare all ordinances and regulations null and void which have been enacted by any jurisdictions other than state and federal, which regulate firearms, ammunition, or components thereof; to prohibit the enactment of any future ordinances or regulations relating to firearms, ammunition, or components thereof unless specifically authorized by this section or general law; and to require local jurisdictions to enforce state firearms laws.
(b) It is further the intent of this section to deter and prevent the violation of this section and the violation of rights protected under the constitution and laws of this state related to firearms, ammunition, or components thereof, by the abuse of official authority that occurs when enactments are passed in violation of state law or under color of local or state authority.
(3) PROHIBITIONS; PENALTIES.—
(a) Any person, county, agency, municipality, district, or other entity that violates the Legislature’s occupation of the whole field of regulation of firearms and ammunition, as declared in subsection (1), by enacting or causing to be enforced any local ordinance or administrative rule or regulation impinging upon such exclusive occupation of the field shall be liable as set forth herein.
(b) If any county, city, town, or other local government violates this section, the court shall declare the improper ordinance, regulation, or rule invalid and issue a permanent injunction against the local government prohibiting it from enforcing such ordinance, regulation, or rule. It is no defense that in enacting the ordinance, regulation, or rule the local government was acting in good faith or upon advice of counsel.
(c) If the court determines that a violation was knowing and willful, the court shall assess a civil fine of up to $5,000 against the elected or appointed local government official or officials or administrative agency head under whose jurisdiction the violation occurred.
(d) Except as required by applicable law, public funds may not be used to defend or reimburse the unlawful conduct of any person found to have knowingly and willfully violated this section.
(e) A knowing and willful violation of any provision of this section by a person acting in an official capacity for any entity enacting or causing to be enforced a local ordinance or administrative rule or regulation prohibited under paragraph (a) or otherwise under color of law shall be cause for termination of employment or contract or removal from office by the Governor.
(f) A person or an organization whose membership is adversely affected by any ordinance, regulation, measure, directive, rule, enactment, order, or policy promulgated or caused to be enforced in violation of this section may file suit against any county, agency, municipality, district, or other entity in any court of this state having jurisdiction over any defendant to the suit for declaratory and injunctive relief and for actual damages, as limited herein, caused by the violation. A court shall award the prevailing plaintiff in any such suit:
1. Reasonable attorney’s fees and costs in accordance with the laws of this state, including a contingency fee multiplier, as authorized by law; and
2. The actual damages incurred, but not more than $100,000.
Interest on the sums awarded pursuant to this subsection shall accrue at the legal rate from the date on which suit was filed.

I don't buy it. A contract is not a regulation. It is an agreement entered into voluntarily by two or more parties that give and receive consideration, which could include an agreement not to participate in certain behaviors.

For example, I have free speech. I can say that Obama is an AH. While I was under contract with the federal government, I was lawfully restricted from saying so while I was in uniform. Perfectly legal. Perfectly reasonable. I agreed not to participate in that behavior by signing a contract subjecting myself to the orders of the officers appointed over me and the orders of the POTUS.

I should add that I would never sign such a contract under the current AH of the United States.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.
<O>

eye95 said:

I don't buy it. A contract is not a regulation. It is an agreement entered into voluntarily by two or more parties that give and receive consideration, which could include an agreement not to participate in certain behaviors.

For example, I have free speech. I can say that Obama is an AH. While I was under contract with the federal government, I was lawfully restricted from saying so while I was in uniform. Perfectly legal. Perfectly reasonable. I agreed not to participate in that behavior by signing a contract subjecting myself to the orders of the officers appointed over me and the orders of the POTUS.

I should add that I would never sign such a contract under the current AH of the United States.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.
<O>

Click to expand...

The city/PD would have to establish some procedure ('rule') mandating the inclusion of such language. Such 'rule' would be unlawful.

notalawyer said:

You are mistaken here. The City/PD, by establishing any rules/regulations/administrative orders as they relate to firearms are clearly in violation of Chapter 790.33 of the Florida Statutes.

Click to expand...

Good luck with that.

It might hold if it was a rule/regulation/administrative order as it related to firearms that effected the public at large. You are attempting to say, in effect, that the pD cannot even establish internal policies regarding what, how, and when cops carry.

And if, as postulated above, The Neighborhood Watch has a relationship with the PD, then 790.33 does not apply. If, OTOH, The Neighborhood Watch is just a bunch of Crackers wandering about and calling 9-1-1 or the non-emergency number to say something if they see something, then you might have a point.

Good luck wuth that.

stay safe.

EMNofSeattle said:

The governor is not the "state" the governor did not create the state in 6 days and rest on the 7th...

the authority for a county or city is made by the legislature.

....

Click to expand...

Are you sure that is your final answer?

(Or would you like to use one of your lifelines to check out the state constitution and the rather extensive case law and custom on the responsibilities of the Chief Executive in inserting the awesome power of the state when the locality refuses to perform its constitutional obligations?)

stay safe.

skidmark said:

Are you sure that is your final answer?

(Or would you like to use one of your lifelines to check out the state constitution and the rather extensive case law and custom on the responsibilities of the Chief Executive in inserting the awesome power of the state when the locality refuses to perform its constitutional obligations?)

stay safe.

Click to expand...

I don't doubt that the Florida constitution and law allows such a thing, I have a distrust of the "Glorious Benevolent Leader" having unilateral authortiy to insert ones self and take action with little review.

skidmark said:

Good luck with that.

It might hold if it was a rule/regulation/administrative order as it related to firearms that effected the public at large. You are attempting to say, in effect, that the pD cannot even establish internal policies regarding what, how, and when cops carry.

And if, as postulated above, The Neighborhood Watch has a relationship with the PD, then 790.33 does not apply. If, OTOH, The Neighborhood Watch is just a bunch of Crackers wandering about and calling 9-1-1 or the non-emergency number to say something if they see something, then you might have a point.

Good luck wuth that.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

You are attempting to say, in effect, that the pD cannot even establish internal policies regarding what, how, and when cops carry.

Click to expand...

They could not unless of course the statute permitted it, which it does.

The PD cannot establish any policy, rule, regulation, etc. that speaks to firearms/ammunition possession/use/ownership/carry/discharge- anything at all to do with firearms unless specifically authorized by the Florida Legislature.

And if, as postulated above, The Neighborhood Watch has a relationship with the PD, then 790.33 does not apply.

Click to expand...

You are incorrect. The statute is pretty clear. Perhaps you should go read it.

Now, The Neighborhood Watch may have such policy, but that policy cannot be established as a result of a rule, regulation, process, procedure, wants, wishes, or desire of any unit of government in the State of Florida, excluding the state Legislature.

MAC702 said:

Yes, I often point to your statute as a model for what we need here. We have preemption, but it has no penalty clause and is violated with impunity by most county and city buildings and parks.

Click to expand...

Not my statute, I'm in Missouri, now, and sometimes in South Carolina. I wish this statute were cloned in both MO and SC. It is far too often that political subdivisions are held harmless because there is no consequence to violating state law. FL seems to have a mechanism to rectify this. Good for FL. However, how often has this consequence been invoked.

EMNofSeattle said:

then carry there, get cited and take the matter to court, then if they enforce the illegal provisions you go after them for civil rights violations.

I don't like the wording of that statute at all, it gives the governor authority to remove a local official from office....... frankly how arragont is it for the state to give one state official the authority to override the will of the voters in that area? very very bad..... the state should have authority over localities but not to that degree. already a sheriff in Florida faced removal by the governor for destroying arrest records of what he thought was an unconstitutional arrest.

Click to expand...

Another emotional response.

You desire that the powers granted to the chief exec. in FL be diminished by the very folks who gave him those powers in the first place.

EMNofSeattle said:

I don't doubt that the Florida constitution and law allows such a thing, I have a distrust of the "Glorious Benevolent Leader" having unilateral authortiy to insert ones self and take action with little review.

Click to expand...

Per my read of the statute being discussed, The Governor does have this power to remove elected official after they have been convicted in a court of law of intentionally and knowingly going against state law. This is NOT a unilateral Governor has all the power situation, but rather a IF YOU HAVE DONE THIS, the GOVERNOR WILL DO THAT cause and effect statute. It is clearly stated and I support it and with my state of residence had a similar law.

skidmark said:

Sory, d
folks, but so far the answers given rate a "BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, Wrong!"

The Neighborhood Watch is a corporate entity that has entered into an agreement with the City - generally through the PD - to do many things, such as the exchange of information, receiving training, and possibly receiving or being loaned equipment (flashlights, reflective vests, radios, etc.). Thus, the City and The Neighborhood Watch can mutually establish rules for participation, or the city can unilaterally establish rules and tell The Neighborhood Watch to abide by them or have support withdrawn.

As there is no compulsion to join/participate in The Neighborhood Watch the laws cited/suggested do not apply.

Set up your own Neighborhood Patrol and see how much cooperation you get from the PD. For some reason I have a feeling that they will not allow the upstart Neighborhood Patrol use their radio frequencies, and may take action against 9-1-1 calls that are not "emergency" emergencies. Do let me know if I have guessed wrongly on this.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

What I would like to know from your post is what law enforcement agency allows those not directly employed by the agency to use their radio frequencies?

EMNofSeattle said:

I don't doubt that the Florida constitution and law allows such a thing, I have a distrust of the "Glorious Benevolent Leader" having unilateral authortiy to insert ones self and take action with little review.

Click to expand...

Did this not just happen when the Governor removed the Sheriff that released the man from jail for CCDW? And after he was acquitted by a jury the Governor put him back as Sheriff immediately.

JustaShooter said:

A NW member has exactly the same authority as any other citizen does, so it really depends on your state law. As I understand it, in most states you can only detain (make a "citizens arrest") if you've witnessed the person actually commit a crime, and it usually has to be a felony.

Click to expand...

In my state, you do not have to witness the commission of a crime to affect a citizen arrest (CA). Most states I have examined that allow a CA does require the commission of a crime that could result in a 1 yr or more jail/prison term but most don't require a citizen to actually witness the crime. Of course there are civil liabilities in affecting a CA ~ so do so only then you have excellent PC.

And , of course, you should chk you local laws...

JoeSparky said:

Per my read of the statute being discussed, The Governor does have this power to remove elected official after they have been convicted in a court of law of intentionally and knowingly going against state law. This is NOT a unilateral Governor has all the power situation, but rather a IF YOU HAVE DONE THIS, the GOVERNOR WILL DO THAT cause and effect statute. It is clearly stated and I support it and with my state of residence had a similar law.

Click to expand...

There are several counties that have instituted Citizen's Patrol where volunteers drive around in specially marked SO vehicles equipped with radios. Not sure about any NW groups getting radios but it would not surprise me.

notalawyer said:

There are several counties that have instituted Citizen's Patrol where volunteers drive around in specially marked SO vehicles equipped with radios. Not sure about any NW groups getting radios but it would not surprise me.

Click to expand...

I don't see the connection between my post you quoted and your reply. ?

Looks like they have changed their mind.

http://bearingarms.com/sanford-fl-p...g-to-disarm-the-neighborhood-watch-after-all/