• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

FL Supreme Kourt: No open carry for you!

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,453
Location
White Oak Plantation
Government does not grant permission(s), it provides for a exemption (tax/fee paid, a permit is a fee...or a tax stamp ) from being subjected to unconstitutional violent force for defying government edicts...not rendering unto Ceasar so to speak.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
I predicted this out come, when the case first came up just read the FL. constitution it gives the state the right to regulate carry.

Yes, however does it give them the right to regulate property?.. A right is no longer a right if said right is regulated, regulation equates to privilege.

My .02
Regards
CCJ
 

Eeyore

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
551
Location
the meanest city in the stupidest state
A right is no longer a right if said right is regulated, regulation equates to privilege.

My understanding of their thought process is this:
  1. The restrictions on possession/carry are the same as the restrictions on the FL concealed carry permit
  2. FL is a "shall issue" state, therefore anyone eligible to carry can apply for and receive a CCP
  3. In their judgment, the fact that one must pay a fee to get said CCP is not sufficiently burdensome on your right to bear arms
So, in their minds, they're just regulating the manner of carry, and open carry is not the "default" right. I'm not saying I like this logic, but it does seem internally consistent.
 

press1280

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
399
Location
Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
Yes but I doubt they will grant it to be heard.

I read an article by Adam Winkler of UCLA who thinks Norman would get cert. This opinion by the FL Supremes has set up a split.

Have to wait and see what happens with Peruta first. With all the rescheduled and relists going on in that case it seems something is happening there.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,276
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Yes, however does it give them the right to regulate property?.. A right is no longer a right if said right is regulated, regulation equates to privilege.

My .02
Regards
CCJ

+1

Why on earth would someone transfer a power to regulate a right? Just totally set aside for the moment whether that is even possible; lets say, for the sake of argument, it is. Why on earth would someone do it? It necessarily means I transfer to someone else the power to decide what my rights are. "I, Citizen, having been overcome with stupidity, transfer and delegate to you the power to decide my rights." Huh!?!!?!!!? And, then, of all things, transfer that power to government!!!!!!!!

The internet does not have enough face-palms and head-banging smileys to convey the dumbness of such a maneuver.


"No man has power over my rights and liberties; and I over no man's." Richard Overton, An Arrow Against All Tyrants and Tyranny, 1646.

http://lf-oll.s3.amazonaws.com/titles/2512/Overton_Arrow1646.pdf
 
Last edited:

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
+1

Why on earth would someone transfer a power to regulate a right? Just totally set aside for the moment whether that is even possible; lets say, for the sake of argument, it is. Why on earth would someone do it? It necessarily means I transfer to someone else the power to decide what my rights are. "I, Citizen, having been overcome with stupidity, transfer and delegate to you the power to decide my rights." Huh!?!!?!!!? And, then, of all things, transfer that power to government!!!!!!!!

The internet does not have enough face-palms and head-banging smileys to convey the dumbness of such a maneuver.


"No man has power over my rights and liberties; and I over no man's." Richard Overton, An Arrow Against All Tyrants and Tyranny, 1646.

http://lf-oll.s3.amazonaws.com/titles/2512/Overton_Arrow1646.pdf

Citizen

Clearly no individual voluntarily surrenders his/her right, you are miss interpreting my post ( no problem). If the government can regulate how one carries their weapon, the weapon is property, therefore the government in theory is regulating your property. Much of said regulation is via, the requirement of a permit or license.. Doing business with the government, via purchasing a permit or a license, which all law abiding citizens undertake, is again in theory is giving the government the power to regulate your property (weapon).. Citizens routinely unbeknown to themselves surrender their right for a government issued privilege. Entering into a contract via the permit or license, gives the government the jurisdiction over your property..

My .02
Regards
CCJ
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
Citizen

Clearly no individual voluntarily surrenders his/her right, you are miss interpreting my post ( no problem). If the government can regulate how one carries their weapon, the weapon is property, therefore the government in theory is regulating your property. Much of said regulation is via, the requirement of a permit or license.. Doing business with the government, via purchasing a permit or a license, which all law abiding citizens undertake, is again in theory is giving the government the power to regulate your property (weapon).. Citizens routinely unbeknown to themselves surrender their right for a government issued privilege. Entering into a contract via the permit or license, gives the government the jurisdiction over your property..

My .02
Regards
CCJ

i'll entertain this.

but let me ask you this. what about all the people who have gotten said permits? are they tied in for life? or just the duration of their permit?
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
i'll entertain this.

but let me ask you this. what about all the people who have gotten said permits? are they tied in for life? or just the duration of their permit?

If the permit is for life than they are under the government jurisdiction for life however if said permit expires, than one can decide whether to enter into another contract with the G... In my humble opinion..

Regards
CCJ
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
i'll entertain this.

but let me ask you this. what about all the people who have gotten said permits? are they tied in for life? or just the duration of their permit?

hammer, as i am discerning...their names are in the 'system' if you will w/no viable methodology to retrieve their names from the giant government computer's database.

for example, NC has a brady exemption ~ FFLs can and often do use the NC PPP or CHP in lieu of contacting the FBI's NICS system (note the box stores still subject purchaser(s)to NICS checks).

additionally, by NC statute (§ 14-402. Sale of certain weapons without permit forbidden), 'pistol' (read handgun) transfer between private citizens mandate the PPP or CHP.

citizen's info in the giant gov computer w/o methodology to delete...

ipse
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,925
Location
North Carolina
hammer, as i am discerning...their names are in the 'system' if you will w/no viable methodology to retrieve their names from the giant government computer's database.

for example, NC has a brady exemption ~ FFLs can and often do use the NC PPP or CHP in lieu of contacting the FBI's NICS system (note the box stores still subject purchaser(s)to NICS checks).

additionally, by NC statute (§ 14-402. Sale of certain weapons without permit forbidden), 'pistol' (read handgun) transfer between private citizens mandate the PPP or CHP.

citizen's info in the giant gov computer w/o methodology to delete...

ipse

It is important to note that the exemption is attributed to the BATFE allowing certain permits by states to be used as BC substitute. A state cannot decide this on their own, they must make the federal list.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
It is important to note that the exemption is attributed to the BATFE allowing certain permits by states to be used as BC substitute. A state cannot decide this on their own, they must make the federal list.

thanks, you are right on with that clarification WW...

ipse
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
If the permit is for life than they are under the government jurisdiction for life however if said permit expires, than one can decide whether to enter into another contract with the G... In my humble opinion..

Regards
CCJ


do we have any court precedent for this idea?

and for the idea of possession of arms without a permit where permit is required but the challenge of what you stated previously?
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
do we have any court precedent for this idea?

and for the idea of possession of arms without a permit where permit is required but the challenge of what you stated previously?

My theory is not currently cited via any court decisions however an in-depth study of the ninth amendment along with.

Murdock v Pa ( 1943)

States do not have the power to license or tax, a right guaranteed by the people..

The ninth amendment tells us how to read other parts of the Constitution.. Griswold v Connecticut (1963)..

I am of the opinion, that the great 2nd amendment barristers in our country, are simply not arguing all the amendments that support the seconds "right to keep and bear arms"" ...

Any restriction on a right, is in theory transforming said right into a government issued privilege.. Law abiding citizens should not be restricted as to where they can protect themselves and their family's, IE, hospitals, schools, courts, airports etc.. Bad guys are everywhere especially in gun free government created zones..

Your results may vary, from mine..

My .02

Stay well Sir!
CCJ
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
...States do not have the power to license or tax, a right guaranteed by[sic] the people..

Well, this is ... mmm... different.
I'm used to sovereign citizens claiming that a national tax is unconstitutional by virtue of any number of amendments to the Constitution as that document only gives the federal government only certain, limited and enumerated powers.

Joe seems to be implying that only the federal government may impose taxes and that therefore only the federal government is wise enough to decide that Cobb county does or doesn't need to have the baseball diamonds at Habersham Park re-sodded, or that the bus stop at the corner of Lexington and Main should have the broken window replaced.

Fascinating.

ETA: Now, I could easily be wrong about this, but I seem to recall Joe being from or residing in New Jersey. It occurs to me then to wonder if Joe has ever read the New Jersey State Constitution wherein the words 'tax', 'taxation', 'taxed', or 'taxes' is mentioned no less than Seventy-Six times.
 
Last edited:

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Well, this is ... mmm... different.
I'm used to sovereign citizens claiming that a national tax is unconstitutional by virtue of any number of amendments to the Constitution as that document only gives the federal government only certain, limited and enumerated powers.

Joe seems to be implying that only the federal government may impose taxes and that therefore only the federal government is wise enough to decide that Cobb county does or doesn't need to have the baseball diamonds at Habersham Park re-sodded, or that the bus stop at the corner of Lexington and Main should have the broken window replaced.

Fascinating.

ETA: Now, I could easily be wrong about this, but I seem to recall Joe being from or residing in New Jersey. It occurs to me then to wonder if Joe has ever read the New Jersey State Constitution wherein the words 'tax', 'taxation', 'taxed', or 'taxes' is mentioned no less than Seventy-Six times.

I have been advocating to have the 1947 New Jersey Constitution revised and remove any reference to a Tax, also attempting to have the Federal Constitution right to keep an bear arms implemented into the Jersey Constitution.

Hence, don't criticize until you walk in my shoes..

Again, I respect you and your ideas and opinions, I only ask that you also respect mine..

My .02
Regards
CCJ
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
I have been advocating to have the 1947 New Jersey Constitution revised and remove any reference to a Tax, also attempting to have the Federal Constitution right to keep an bear arms implemented into the Jersey Constitution.

Hence, don't criticize until you walk in my shoes..

Again, I respect you and your ideas and opinions, I only ask that you also respect mine..

So, let me get this straight...
You believe that the States have no authority to impose taxes upon the citizens of the state, correct?

Do you believe that only the Federal Government has the authority to impose taxes?

Do you believe that as the tax collector and therefor disburser of those taxed monies that the Federal Government knows best where to spend the dollars, which roads, which state parks, which broken sewer mains in every hamlet, village, town, burg, and city of the nation require maintenance?

Do you believe that the Federal Government is the best determiner of how much of a tax burden any particular community should be forced to bear?


Oh, and in respect to respecting your opinion....
Oswalt_zpsyncov6tl.png



I don't have to respect your opinion any more than I have to respect the opinion of a devout Muslim that women who have been raped are adulteresses and should be stoned, or that homosexuality should be punished by throwing people off the tops of tall buildings.
 
Last edited:

jammer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2008
Messages
84
Location
, ,
TAXES

So, let me get this straight...
You believe that the States have no authority to impose taxes upon the citizens of the state, correct?

Do you believe that only the Federal Government has the authority to impose taxes?

Do you believe that as the tax collector and therefor disburser of those taxed monies that the Federal Government knows best where to spend the dollars, which roads, which state parks, which broken sewer mains in every hamlet, village, town, burg, and city of the nation require maintenance?

Do you believe that the Federal Government is the best determiner of how much of a tax burden any particular community should be forced to bear?


Oh, and in respect to respecting your opinion....
Oswalt_zpsyncov6tl.png



I don't have to respect your opinion any more than I have to respect the opinion of a devout Muslim that women who have been raped are adulteresses and should be stoned, or that homosexuality should be punished by throwing people off the tops of tall buildings.
I THINK THAT countryclubjoe IS SAYING, THAT THE STATE OR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO TAX A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT ON ANYONE, THEREFOR A LAW ABIDING PERSON, CANNOT BE MADE TO PAY FOR A LICENSE, FOR THEIR RIGHT TO EXERCISE THEIR 2ND AMENDMENT RITE. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
 

JamesCanby

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,480
Location
Alexandria, VA at www.NoVA-MDSelfDefense.com
So, let me get this straight...
You believe that the States have no authority to impose taxes upon the citizens of the state, correct?

Do you believe that only the Federal Government has the authority to impose taxes?

Do you believe that as the tax collector and therefor disburser of those taxed monies that the Federal Government knows best where to spend the dollars, which roads, which state parks, which broken sewer mains in every hamlet, village, town, burg, and city of the nation require maintenance?

Do you believe that the Federal Government is the best determiner of how much of a tax burden any particular community should be forced to bear?


Oh, and in respect to respecting your opinion....
Oswalt_zpsyncov6tl.png



I don't have to respect your opinion any more than I have to respect the opinion of a devout Muslim that women who have been raped are adulteresses and should be stoned, or that homosexuality should be punished by throwing people off the tops of tall buildings.

^^^ What HE said...
 
Top