Florida Carry legal victory makes way for constitutional challenge to Open Carry Ban

77zach · Nov 8, 2014

marshaul said:
That was astonishingly bad.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that maybe, just maybe, she was only there because she was legally required to be, and that her heart wasn't in it.

But maybe that's too charitable to a government attorney.

That's what it sounded like to me also. She was a giant boob. Eric Friday did his homework and did very well. If the court has a lot of integrity we should be a gold star state by the end of the next legislative session. If they have a little integrity cwfl people should be able to OC everywhere we can CC.

One question though. I don't really understand why we would need a stay. In 2011, the off limits places for license holders was changed to disallow open carry where CWF holders were barred. If you give the neocons in the FL Senate an inch they will add a ton of more restrictions on OC.

I would have suggested being very narrow and only including handguns being a right to OC, that is what Mr. Norman was carrying afterall. Long gun OC is what lots of people, including probably these judges, are concerned about.

randian · Nov 8, 2014

77zach said:
In 2011, the off limits places for license holders was changed to disallow open carry where CWF holders were barred. If you give the neocons in the FL Senate an inch they will add a ton of more restrictions on OC.

If OC gets the same places as CC, it's more likely they add restrictions to both to keep the horror of OC in check. Florida needs fewer off limits places (like schools and non-secure areas of airports), not more.

77zach · Nov 8, 2014

randian said:
If OC gets the same places as CC, it's more likely they add restrictions to both to keep the horror of OC in check. Florida needs fewer off limits places (like schools and non-secure areas of airports), not more.

The Senate is so anti liberty they'll probably just let the fl sheriff association write a bill. If the court does right and doesn't give them a whole lot of wiggle room, the fsa will put pressure on Bondi to appeal to the anti gun FL supreme kourt. She's a giant bootlicker so she'll be glad to do it.

Always expect the worst out of the control freaks.

notalawyer · Nov 8, 2014

randian said:
If OC gets the same places as CC, it's more likely they add restrictions to both to keep the horror of OC in check. Florida needs fewer off limits places (like schools and non-secure areas of airports), not more.

That will be much more difficult to do with open carry (the right) vs concealed carry (the privilege). A completely different level of constitutional scrutiny.

randian · Nov 8, 2014

notalawyer said:
That will be much more difficult to do with open carry (the right) vs concealed carry (the privilege). A completely different level of constitutional scrutiny.

I think you are terribly mistaken if you believe that the courts, especially Florida's terribly liberal supreme court, are going to let OC have a larger set of allowed areas than CC. Most likely, if they just don't invent some BS justification for continuing the OC ban, they'll say that you can OC everywhere you can CC. That ruling would be well calculated to prompt the legislature to further restrict CC, which would in turn restrict OC, and which generally furthers the court's interest in restricting carry.

77zach · Nov 8, 2014

notalawyer said:
That will be much more difficult to do with open carry (the right) vs concealed carry (the privilege). A completely different level of constitutional scrutiny.

Lawyer, I'd be interested in your speculation as to how all these things end for OC in Fl.

JoeSparky · Nov 9, 2014

BB62 said:
Wow. Thanks for the video. The state attorney was a joke!

Well, IMO, she did have a very difficult task before her to defend a law for which there seems to be very little justification. If one may speculate based on some of the queries from the bench, she was in an absolute 'no win' situation.

I do hope the final ruling matches my opinion here!

randian · Nov 9, 2014

Somewhat telling is the judges didn't make overt attempts to save her. You can tell when judges are leading the lawyer for their preferred side with guiding and softball questions.

77zach · Nov 9, 2014

randian said:
I think you are terribly mistaken if you believe that the courts, especially Florida's terribly liberal supreme court, are going to let OC have a larger set of allowed areas than CC. Most likely, if they just don't invent some BS justification for continuing the OC ban, they'll say that you can OC everywhere you can CC. That ruling would be well calculated to prompt the legislature to further restrict CC, which would in turn restrict OC, and which generally furthers the court's interest in restricting carry.

If the court does the obvious and right thing (declaring 790.053 unconstitutional AND that OC is an unlicensed right), it's not completely up to the neocon Senate however. The Senate is going to have to agree with the House, which is probably one of the more pro gun chambers of all the chambers in the country. There are not a few House members in the GOP supermajority who wouldn't lose sleep over having no off limits OC places if the Senate drags its feet.

notalawyer · Nov 10, 2014

77zach said:
Lawyer, I'd be interested in your speculation as to how all these things end for OC in Fl.

I see a ruling that OC is a constitutionally protected fundamental right, and that 790.053 is unconstitutional. The court will stay their ruling for 90-180 days to allow for the legislature to establish 'reasonable regulations'.

But honestly, I don't see unlicensed open carry coming out of this case. That's going to be a very big pill to swallow for the FSA and the FRF.

What I see initially, is open carry for CWFL holders and/or subject to the same restrictions.

I also see a very big push to make 'no firearms' signs on private property legally enforceable. It will be seen as a 'reasonable' solution to the 'problem'.

I also envision the Florida legislature royally screwing all of this up, as has been their historical pattern with firearm/weapons law.

I also expect to see little to no support from the NRA on this. (I hope to be pleasantly surprised here, though)

As usual, it's all going to come down to politics, money and emotion. "Blood will run in the streets", "All the tourists will stop coming to Florida.", etc.

But, I have been wrong in the past...not very often mind you, but yes, on occasion. :lol:

77zach · Nov 10, 2014

notalawyer said:
I see a ruling that OC is a constitutionally protected fundamental right, and that 790.053 is unconstitutional. The court will stay their ruling for 90-180 days to allow for the legislature to establish 'reasonable regulations'.

Wow, that would be cool. I'll never be so happy to be wrong about a political topic. Yes, no doubt the FRF would push for signage, I'd almost rather see OC fail than see that. The FSA wants us disarmed period. I hope you're wrong about the NRA. The Hammer believes in OC, it's just not as high on her agenda as I'd like.

Adrich86 · Nov 10, 2014

BB62 said:
Wow. Thanks for the video. The state attorney was a joke!

Yeah I'm starting to think she was intentionally bad at making her argument. Isn't the state attorneys office constitutionally obligated to defend law in cases like this? Perhaps she was told to be bad or they threw their worst person in there on short notice.

randian · Nov 10, 2014

notalawyer said:
I also see a very big push to make 'no firearms' signs on private property legally enforceable. It will be seen as a 'reasonable' solution to the 'problem'.

That would be a huge loss and not worth getting OC if it happened. I'd expect that as a poison pill designed to stop the OC effort. Additional prohibited place restrictions are another potential poison pill.

randian · Nov 10, 2014

Adrich86 said:
Isn't the state attorneys office constitutionally obligated to defend law in cases like this?

You'd think so, but subverting the will of the legislature and the people by not defending laws is a favorite tactic of the left these days, as are consent agreements. This is notable only because it violates expectations.

The Truth · Nov 10, 2014

Zero compromise!!!!!

77zach · Nov 10, 2014

The Truth said:
Zero compromise!!!!!

Honestly, if the optimists here and in other forums are right about what is going to happen court-wise...... I don't see why we have to do anything except run the clock out if the opposition wants to play hard ball like in 2011.

If 790.053 goes away we already have "reasonable restrictions" as our no go list includes both open and concealed carry. We also have 790. 10 which criminalize reckless, rude, or threatening behavior with firearms.

Just think, if the speaker of the House and Senate ,or just Rick Scott, were for unlicensed OC, that would be a done deal. He could veto a FRF/FSA bill and let the chips fall where they may. Oh, how I would love to see Charlie Dean and Jack Latvala tear up!

In the meantime, I'm just wanting to eat my words with this court decision.

We-the-People · Nov 11, 2014

Well I finally had the opportunity to view the video and all I can say is WOW~!!!!!!!

The state hemmed and hawed quite a bit and didn't come across well. I'm curious how her "public safety" issue works out when she admits that there are exceptions to the OC ban (hunting, fishing, going to the range, etc.). Not all of those exceptions requires a license and yet the state is perfectly willing to allow OC by people in such situations while wanting to criminalize the licensed person who open carries. I just don't see how the state can think that's a winning argument.

It didn't help that her "understanding" of Heller and McDonald was, I'll being generous, "lacking".

The courts are tricky critters but the questions presented from the bench.....I loved "how would you write the opinion"...... I would say things are looking pretty good.

2OLD2W8 · Nov 11, 2014

I wonder why Mr. Friday was only allowed approximately 3 minutes for rebuttal in lieu of the 5 minutes as originally stated by the female judge?

randian · Nov 11, 2014

2OLD2W8 said:
I wonder why Mr. Friday was only allowed approximately 3 minutes for rebuttal in lieu of the 5 minutes as originally stated by the female judge?

Blatant favoritism?

77zach · Nov 11, 2014

2OLD2W8 said:
I wonder why Mr. Friday was only allowed approximately 3 minutes for rebuttal in lieu of the 5 minutes as originally stated by the female judge?

He didn't need it, he cleaned house. I've watched it twice now, it really is open and shut. I also had previously missed one of the proofs used to show 790.053's unconstitutionality. At 12:30 Mr. Friday showed the legislature admits unlicensed carry is a right in its preamble to 790.25. It is very bizarre. Fl's statutes on "gun laws" are seriously stupid.

Florida Carry legal victory makes way for constitutional challenge to Open Carry Ban

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Centurion

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

New member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member