|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 24, 2013, 08:28 AM | #1 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
media item.about concealed carry lawsuit; Daytona Beach Florida.....
The Orlando FL Fox station; www.myfoxorlando.com has a news story about a 2A group/concealed carry advocate that filed a civil suit against the mayor & police department of Daytona Beach FL. The suit is based on a US military veteran in FL who contacted a help-line while intoxicated. The PD came to the veterans home & transfered him to a mental health facility for a psych eval(in FL its commonly called Baker Act). The police took several firearms & bows too.
The veteran was cleared by the mental health treatment center but when he went to the Daytona Beach FL police to get his property, the police refused to release it back to him. The civil case is still pending but I'm sure it will be worth watching. Florida made new changes to the gun laws & this event may set a precedent. I personally think the veteran's civil rights were violated. He was not deemed unstable or put into a mental health hospital. Alcohol is a depressent. He may have drank too much then made bad decisions. Note; 05/24/2013 is the report date, Valerie Boey is the Fox 35 reporter. ClydeFrog |
May 24, 2013, 09:50 AM | #2 |
Junior Member
Join Date: October 15, 2000
Location: Port Orange, FL
Posts: 8
|
That was us. Details in the case here: http://www.floridacarry.org/litigati...-daytona-beach
|
May 26, 2013, 02:07 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
|
Cant believe this kind of jack booted nonsense happens even in my former home state of Florida. Give em hell a settlement for a few million might make some of these agencies think twice about violating the law.
__________________
"....The swords of others will set you your limits". |
May 26, 2013, 03:16 PM | #4 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
|
They're just getting in some practice in case the proposed law passes.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=525345 |
May 27, 2013, 01:03 AM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
|
What the heck is happening to Florida? I was looking forward to retiring there in another 30 or 40 years, not so much at this rate! Heck at this rate Idaho or Montana might be the only safe pro gun places left in 2050....
__________________
"....The swords of others will set you your limits". |
May 27, 2013, 12:08 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
|
I could maybe see taking the guns initially, but as soon as he was cleared his property should have been immediately returned.
|
May 27, 2013, 05:22 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 18, 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 254
|
I can fully understand taking them to start with as a safety measure but once he has been cleared there is no reason to not return them. Keep us posted on the lawsuit.
|
May 28, 2013, 12:12 AM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Posts: 3,084
|
They're also pushing a law suit now about a person who accidentally revealed their CCW and was charged with illegal open carry. Basically, the lawsuit says that because we have a constitutional right to bear arms, if CC is restricted to permit, then open carry must be constitutional and unrestricted.
I've become a fan of them |
May 28, 2013, 06:28 PM | #9 |
Junior member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: The "Gunshine State"
Posts: 1,981
|
IIRC, the penalty for inadvertent exposure was eliminated already
|
May 28, 2013, 08:51 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Posts: 3,084
|
I thought so as well but it seems somebody else is being charged. Perhaps they were charged before the law was changed
|
May 29, 2013, 02:59 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 25, 2009
Posts: 566
|
That is sad; I hope they get this man his property back and in good condition.
Regarding the settlement teaching the city managers etc. a lesson: Bear in mind that they will not be paying that settlement from their pockets but from the pockets of the taxpayers; that money is always easier spent, IMO. |
May 29, 2013, 05:01 PM | #12 | |
Member
Join Date: August 11, 2009
Location: A Calguns Interloper
Posts: 39
|
Unless they are sued under 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983, commonly referred to as "section 1983" suit. Then personal immunity doesn't always apply and individuals can be held personally liable for damages, from my understanding.
Quote:
http://www.constitution.org/brief/forsythe_42-1983.htm |
|
May 29, 2013, 08:03 PM | #13 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,797
|
enforcement....
I take issue with the enforcement aspects of the new Florida laws.
Many sworn Florida deputies detectives agents FWC officers troopers etc DO NOT get updates or legal notifications by the AGs Office: www.myfloridalegal.com or the FDLE. Budget cuts training cycles lack of manpower etc are the regular excuses in FL. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|