Would like some input

Anything and Everything dealing with Political issues.
Post Reply
User avatar
Racist Infidel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 726
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:07 pm
Location: Ft. McCoy

Would like some input

Post by Racist Infidel » Wed Mar 15, 2017 4:26 pm

Just running some stuff through my head. After seeing this I had some questions.

http://www.bradenton.com/news/local/art ... 24303.html

"Sheriffs in Manatee and Sarasota counties have changed security policies at their clerks of court’s offices, allowing visitors with concealed weapons permits to enter the buildings with their weapons — despite a judge’s order to ban weapons because courthouse business is handled there.

"Sarasota County Sheriff Thomas M. Knight said Friday he will not return deputies and security checkpoints outside the clerk of court’s office, saying that would encroach on the constitutional rights of citizens to carry a weapon and against unlawful search and seizure. "

Now the Florida Constitution says, "SECTION 8. Right to bear arms.—(a) The right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and of the lawful authority of the state shall not be infringed, except that the manner of bearing arms may be regulated by law. So as I read the Constitution, the "manner", i.e. open vs concealed carry, is within the powers delegated to our representatives.

The firearms statutes, Chapter 790, list not only the "manner of bearing" arms but also the "where" of bearing arms.

So the question is, are the "where's" in the Statutes within the scope of the "manner" allowed the legislators to regulate? :-k

AirForceShooter
Life Member
Life Member
Posts: 3052
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 10:48 am
Location: Manatee Fla. / Huntersville N.C.

Re: Would like some input

Post by AirForceShooter » Thu Mar 16, 2017 5:30 am

Sheriffs are right.

The location is NOT a courthouse.

AFS
There is something charming about the sound of bullets-----George Washington

User avatar
Racist Infidel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 726
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:07 pm
Location: Ft. McCoy

Re: Would like some input

Post by Racist Infidel » Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:50 am

What I'm heading to is the wording of our Constitution. It clearly states that my Right to maintain and bear arms "shall not be infringed."

INFRINGE, verb transitive infrinj'. [Latin infringo; in and frango, to break. See Break.]
1. To break, as contracts; to violate, either positively by contravention, or negatively by non-fulfillment or neglect of performance. A prince or a private person infringes an agreement or covenant by neglecting to perform its conditions,
as well as by doing what is stipulated not to be done.

http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Infringe

So our Constitution states that the Right to maintain arms shall not be infringed and then the legislators turn around and "infringe" on that Right through Section 790 of the Statutes. I'm just trying to get my head around how they get away with it. :-k

I learned early on that just because something is does not make it right.

User avatar
jjk308
Life Member
Life Member
Posts: 5353
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:08 pm
Location: Oldsmar, Florida USA

Re: Would like some input

Post by jjk308 » Thu Mar 16, 2017 12:10 pm

US Constitution Article 1, Section 8
Section 8. The Congress shall have Power ....To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

We are the militia so under the substantial control of laws passed by Cingress. The personal right to keep and bear arms is in the 2nd Amendment per the Heller, etc. decisions and so far the courts have allowed substantial regulation of that right by states and localities.

I hope that one of these days our politicians decide that gun control is a dry hole, having no effect on crime because criminals will ignore it and will always have access to the black market portion of our 320,000,000 firearms regardless of the restrictions on the law abiding. Even Justice Dept funded and directed studies have found no effect for the gun laws.
I swear by Jupiter Optimus Maximus .... in the army of the consul Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus and for 10 miles around it I will not steal anything worth more than a sestertius in any one day.

User avatar
Racist Infidel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 726
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:07 pm
Location: Ft. McCoy

Re: Would like some input

Post by Racist Infidel » Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:38 pm

I'm referring to the Florida Constitution. While the US Constitution has the Militia wording, Florida's Constitution does not. It simply states that the Right to maintain and bear arms shall not be infringed; period. If you look at States such as NY, their State Constitution does not have any Right to bear arms called out. So under their Constitution, the State can regulate firearms. I'm not trying to open that can of worms. We could get into the 14th A and all that but just not now. [smilie=011.gif]

So the question is, how can they regulate the "where" of bearing arms? The only authority I can find in Florida's Constitution is the regulation of the "how," or manner of carry. Those powers granted the State by the governed does NOT include the "where," so that power is still vested with The People.

Some times I don't see the forest cause all them damn trees get in the way. So what am I missing in all this? :-k

Cloaked Dagger
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 773
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 11:57 pm
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: Would like some input

Post by Cloaked Dagger » Sun Mar 19, 2017 8:43 am

Racist Infidel wrote:I'm referring to the Florida Constitution. While the US Constitution has the Militia wording, Florida's Constitution does not. It simply states that the Right to maintain and bear arms shall not be infringed; period. If you look at States such as NY, their State Constitution does not have any Right to bear arms called out. So under their Constitution, the State can regulate firearms. I'm not trying to open that can of worms. We could get into the 14th A and all that but just not now. [smilie=011.gif]

So the question is, how can they regulate the "where" of bearing arms? The only authority I can find in Florida's Constitution is the regulation of the "how," or manner of carry. Those powers granted the State by the governed does NOT include the "where," so that power is still vested with The People.

Some times I don't see the forest cause all them damn trees get in the way. So what am I missing in all this? :-k
What you are missing is that the government will do what it wants regardless of what's right or constitutional until somebody stops them. There are provisions for other parts of the government to stop them but being part of government themselves they aren't really particularly interested in our freedom so they haven't yet.
Libertas aut mortis!

User avatar
jjk308
Life Member
Life Member
Posts: 5353
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:08 pm
Location: Oldsmar, Florida USA

Re: Would like some input

Post by jjk308 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:20 pm

Racist Infidel wrote:I'm referring to the Florida Constitution. While the US Constitution has the Militia wording, Florida's Constitution does not. It simply states that the Right to maintain and bear arms shall not be infringed; period. If you look at States such as NY, their State Constitution does not have any Right to bear arms called out. So under their Constitution, the State can regulate firearms. I'm not trying to open that can of worms. We could get into the 14th A and all that but just not now.
The US Constitution overrides any state legislation and Article 1 Section 8 says Congress can regulate the militia, which is anyone capable of bearing arms, and the 2nd Amendment has been interpreted as protecting an individual right to keep and bear arms. The State constitutions are limited to covering state government actions, which muct also be within the individual's 2nd Amendment rights now that the 2nd Amendment has been incorporated in the Constitution by the Heller decision as covering both State and Federal governments.
I swear by Jupiter Optimus Maximus .... in the army of the consul Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus and for 10 miles around it I will not steal anything worth more than a sestertius in any one day.

User avatar
Racist Infidel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 726
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:07 pm
Location: Ft. McCoy

Re: Would like some input

Post by Racist Infidel » Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:54 pm

The question is, if the Florida Constriction only grants the State authority to infringe on my God given Right to maintain and bear arms is in the "MANNER" of bearing arms, how can all the other "infringements" promulgated in FS 790 as to the "where" be constitutional under the Florida Constitution? The US Constitution is mute on this, allowing no infringement at all.

If We The People, who approved our State Constitution, clearly only grant the authority to our representatives is to regulate the "manner" of how we may carry arms, why do we accept the infringements NOT granted to the State? 

Where does our Florida Constitution delegate to the State the authority to dictate "where" I may or may not carry? :-k

Post Reply