Go Back   Maryland Shooters > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues
Don't Have An Account? Register Here

Join MD Shooters

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 29th, 2013, 07:49 PM #1
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 4,093
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 4,093
Norman v. State (FL) Open Carry lawsuit

Guy is arrested for open carry of a pistol, but just received his CCW that very day. State precedent says CCW is a privilege, not a right. State is pushing forward with prosecution.

https://www.floridacarry.org/index.p...norman-v-state

Briefs have been filed by Norman, Florida, and now Norman's reply is in. The state's position makes this a case to watch. They are not claiming that shall-issue CCW satisfies the right; simply that a ban on OC is a reasonable regulation(they say it over and over again with no evidence).

This is currently in a FL appeals court.

The State argues that because reasonable regulation of the right to bear arms
is allowed, and because the State believes the regulation at issue to be reasonable,
the ban on open carry passes constitutional muster.
press1280 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 08:35 PM #2
RightNYer RightNYer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 454
RightNYer RightNYer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
Guy is arrested for open carry of a pistol, but just received his CCW that very day. State precedent says CCW is a privilege, not a right. State is pushing forward with prosecution.

https://www.floridacarry.org/index.p...norman-v-state

Briefs have been filed by Norman, Florida, and now Norman's reply is in. The state's position makes this a case to watch. They are not claiming that shall-issue CCW satisfies the right; simply that a ban on OC is a reasonable regulation(they say it over and over again with no evidence).

This is currently in a FL appeals court.

The State argues that because reasonable regulation of the right to bear arms
is allowed, and because the State believes the regulation at issue to be reasonable,
the ban on open carry passes constitutional muster.
Why shouldn't they argue that? The federal judiciary has made clear that a state's belief that a regulation is reasonable makes it in fact, "reasonable." No evidence need be provided.
RightNYer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 08:38 PM #3
Brooklyn's Avatar
Brooklyn Brooklyn is offline
I stand with John Locke.
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
Posts: 12,889
Brooklyn Brooklyn is offline
I stand with John Locke.
Brooklyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
Posts: 12,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by RightNYer View Post
Why shouldn't they argue that? The federal judiciary has made clear that a state's belief that a regulation is reasonable makes it in fact, "reasonable." No evidence need be provided.
Try again.. nothing is clear.. and fl is pushing it hard...

Case to watch for sure.
__________________
If one seeks light, you must avoid heat.

New motto for Baltimore contest winner???

Baltimore : It's not as f..ked as you think....

Liberty is NOT a loophole.

Thanks for a great slogan...now window stickers.
Brooklyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 08:42 PM #4
RightNYer RightNYer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 454
RightNYer RightNYer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyn View Post
Try again.. nothing is clear.. and fl is pushing it hard...

Case to watch for sure.
How is it not clear? The 4th, 2nd, 3rd and D.C. Circuits have all ruled exactly that.
RightNYer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 11:28 PM #5
Brooklyn's Avatar
Brooklyn Brooklyn is offline
I stand with John Locke.
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
Posts: 12,889
Brooklyn Brooklyn is offline
I stand with John Locke.
Brooklyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
Posts: 12,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by RightNYer View Post
How is it not clear? The 4th, 2nd, 3rd and D.C. Circuits have all ruled exactly that.
RB IS NOT IS. RB DOES NOT BECOME IS JUST BECAUSE THE COURT DOES NOT WANT TO DO ITS JOB.
__________________
If one seeks light, you must avoid heat.

New motto for Baltimore contest winner???

Baltimore : It's not as f..ked as you think....

Liberty is NOT a loophole.

Thanks for a great slogan...now window stickers.
Brooklyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 11:41 PM #6
RightNYer RightNYer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 454
RightNYer RightNYer is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyn View Post
RB IS NOT IS. RB DOES NOT BECOME IS JUST BECAUSE THE COURT DOES NOT WANT TO DO ITS JOB.
Of course. I don't disagree with you. But as long as the people aren't willing to literally storm the courthouses with pitchforks and take the judges out, the BS they spew carries the force of the law.
RightNYer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 30th, 2013, 04:48 AM #7
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 4,093
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 4,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by RightNYer View Post
Why shouldn't they argue that? The federal judiciary has made clear that a state's belief that a regulation is reasonable makes it in fact, "reasonable." No evidence need be provided.
The trick used in CA2,3, and 4 was intermediate scrutiny two-step. They're actually arguing rational basis here.
FL's strategy here, seems to me, will almost guarantee an opinion that will be highly useful for a split.
press1280 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 30th, 2013, 09:25 AM #8
Brooklyn's Avatar
Brooklyn Brooklyn is offline
I stand with John Locke.
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
Posts: 12,889
Brooklyn Brooklyn is offline
I stand with John Locke.
Brooklyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
Posts: 12,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
The trick used in CA2,3, and 4 was intermediate scrutiny two-step. They're actually arguing rational basis here.
FL's strategy here, seems to me, will almost guarantee an opinion that will be highly useful for a split.
Thanks for pointing that out - I am way behind on my reading list -- very helpful
__________________
If one seeks light, you must avoid heat.

New motto for Baltimore contest winner???

Baltimore : It's not as f..ked as you think....

Liberty is NOT a loophole.

Thanks for a great slogan...now window stickers.
Brooklyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 08:36 PM #9
Brooklyn's Avatar
Brooklyn Brooklyn is offline
I stand with John Locke.
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
Posts: 12,889
Brooklyn Brooklyn is offline
I stand with John Locke.
Brooklyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
Posts: 12,889
Wow.. they really want to push this?

Its not even real open carry.....

If this is how it is in Fl god help us Here in Md....
__________________
If one seeks light, you must avoid heat.

New motto for Baltimore contest winner???

Baltimore : It's not as f..ked as you think....

Liberty is NOT a loophole.

Thanks for a great slogan...now window stickers.
Brooklyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2013, 09:52 PM #10
fightinbluhen51's Avatar
fightinbluhen51 fightinbluhen51 is offline
"Quack Pot Call Honker"
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,580
fightinbluhen51 fightinbluhen51 is offline
"Quack Pot Call Honker"
fightinbluhen51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,580
This is an older case (and has been discussed here prior).

Certainly sets up a split potential. (If I am not mistaken it sets up a State Supreme Court vs. US Circuit split, intra-circuit).

But, that said, my new job has me spinning my head the last few days.
__________________

“It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, who keep on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men”-SAMUEL ADAMS, 1776
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
fightinbluhen51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2018, Congregate Media, LP Privacy Policy Terms of Service