Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: FYI: SAF, Florida Carry sue Tallahassee over discharge ordinance

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    FYI: SAF, Florida Carry sue Tallahassee over discharge ordinance

    SAF, Florida Carry sue Tallahassee over alleged gun law violation

    The Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation announced today it had joined forces with Florida Carry, Inc., filing a lawsuit against the City of Tallahassee over an apparent refusal to amend a local ordinance that conflicts with the Sunshine State’s preemption law.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/brea...-law-violation

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Some low lying fruit to be picked ... only lawyers make out on this ...

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    What is Law is Law, and Florida Code 790.33 is NO Exception!

    Florida Carry also Sued Broward County as Well.
    Last edited by aadvark; 05-03-2014 at 04:09 PM.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by aadvark View Post
    What is Law is Law, and Florida Code 790.33 is NO Exception!

    Florida Carry also Sued Broward County as Well.
    There are many laws that get superseded with others .. they just leave them on the books .. they're lazy.

    The problem is that a cop will read the ordinance and mess with people.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    17
    It's not that they don't know their laws are illegal. They have been approached about it but refuse to change their laws.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by MasterGadgets View Post
    It's not that they don't know their laws are illegal. They have been approached about it but refuse to change their laws.
    Do you want judges to order them to pass a law rescinding the old one? I don't want judges to have that authority.

    They can rule its unlawful ... that's good enough in my book.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Do you want judges to order them to pass a law rescinding the old one? I don't want judges to have that authority.

    They can rule its unlawful ... that's good enough in my book.
    No. I think that would be a violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine.


    But, since this is a willful violation of the law, certain punitive actions should be taken:

    A $5,000 fine for each member (which cannot be paid with public money) and an order that they reimburse the city for the costs of the litigation.

    The court order should then state that if the law is not repealed within let's say 60 days:

    An order requiring city council notify to all law enforcement personnel under it's jurisdiction of the order in say 60 days. Any action taken by anyone after that date will result in the same $5,000 fine; termination from employment (or removal from office for elected folks) by the Governor as provided for in the law; and contempt of court charges.

    Refusal by any council member to 'authorize' such notification should result in contempt of court charges and a 'removal from office' recommendation to the Governor.


    That way the city council is given a choice and there are no constitutional issues involved.


    And of course a final order by the court that any subsequent action by the city council in violation state law on this topic will result in a fine another $5,000 fine; and recommendation by the court to the Governor that he immediately remove from each member involved from office; and contempt of court charges.






    All nice and tidy, lawful and constitutional.
    Last edited by notalawyer; 05-10-2014 at 12:42 PM.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746
    The continued promulgation (publication) of these illegal ordinances is forbidden under 790.33(3)f. Since all ordinances must be published in the code of ordinances, the appropriate remedy for the court is a writ of mandamus compelling the city/county to repeal or amend. The courts have always had this power... Checks and balances.
    Last edited by StogieC; 05-11-2014 at 10:27 AM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161
    Quote Originally Posted by StogieC View Post
    The continued promulgation (publication) of these illegal ordinances is forbidden under 790.33(3)f. Since all ordinances must be published in the code of ordinances, the appropriate remedy for the court is a writ of mandamus compelling the city/county to repeal or amend. The courts have always had this power... Checks and balances.
    Because Wisconsin suffers similarly (http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-prohibited) can you cite case law that might suggest an effective course of action.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran StogieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Because Wisconsin suffers similarly (http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ons-prohibited) can you cite case law that might suggest an effective course of action.
    It is all very dependant on how the state preemption statute is written. We wrote the enforcement provisions of Florida's in 2011 so we were able to make it pretty effective. This is not to say that it is prefect... In hindsight there are some minor tweaks we could have made to make it even more effective.

    If you guys have a Wisconsin attorney dealing with preemption actions please put him in touch with us. We will help any way we can.

    NRA v. South Miami and Florida Carry v. UNF are good cases to start with.
    Last edited by StogieC; 07-16-2014 at 02:46 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •