(FL) PSL not pulling trigger on law

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
PSL not pulling trigger on law

By CHRIS YOUNG
[email protected]
June 3, 2006
PORT ST. LUCIE — City police are no longer enforcing an ordinance prohibiting people from discharging firearms within the city limits.
Because the ordinance appears to conflict with state law, City Attorney Roger Orr placed a moratorium on enforcement last month, after a woman threatened a lawsuit over being arrested for firing a BB gun in her backyard.

Florida law appears to take away a city legal tool "that would prevent people from shooting up their neighborhoods," Orr said Friday.
The city ordinance, passed in 1975, allowed police to arrest anyone discharging a firearm or other weapon unless it was in self-defense.

Police now are researching state laws for other ways to make those arrests, said police spokesman Robert Vega.

"Although we're very frustrated we can't use the city ordinance, there are other tools in the chest we can use to make an arrest at the scene," Vega said.

The moratorium had a practical effect Thursday night when police were called to the 2400 block of Southeast Stonecrop Street, where two brothers had fired a semiautomatic rifle at trees in their backyard.

According to a police report, the officer didn't arrest them because of the moratorium, but confiscated several weapons, including the rifle, which fires the same caliber round as an AK-47. Vega said police forwarded the case to the state attorney's office for possible future action.

Orr ordered the moratorium after Leda Foreman, 46, threatened to sue the city over her arrest in November for shooting a BB gun at a target in her backyard. The charges were dropped in February.

Foreman's lawyer said the city ordinance was unconstitutional because it conflicted with state law, which allows for "a person firing weapons for testing or target practice under safe conditions and in a safe place."

Orr said "it appears to be the case" the city ordinance was preempted by state statute. The state Legislature has declared it "is occupying the whole field of regulation of firearms and ammunition."

Orr said he is considering bringing an amended ordinance to the City Council at a later date.

Vice Mayor Patricia Christensen said she wanted the city's legal department to see if the city's noise ordinance could be strengthened to deter people from firing weapons.

"I hope this doesn't open up (situations) to where anyone with a gun can fire on trees or wildlife in their back yard, taking target practice," she said. "At the same time, I don't want an ordinance that can be challenged legally."


Conflicting gun laws
Port St. Lucie's ordinance on the discharge of weapons appears to conflict with state law:

City ordinance: "(I)t shall be unlawful for any person to discharge any gun, firearm, crossbow, or air or spring gun launching a projectile within the city limits, except in self-defense, in case of imminent danger."

State law: "(T)he Legislature hereby declares that it is occupying the whole field of regulation of firearms and ammunition ... to the exclusion of all existing and future county, city, town, or municipal ordinances or regulations relating thereto."

http://www.tcpalm.com/tcp/local_news/article/0,2545,TCP_16736_4746077,00.html
 
The moratorium had a practical effect Thursday night when police were called to the 2400 block of Southeast Stonecrop Street, where two brothers had fired a semiautomatic rifle at trees in their backyard.

According to a police report, the officer didn't arrest them because of the moratorium, but confiscated several weapons, including the rifle

Under whose authority and authorization? If there is no law prohibiting the activity (in effect, anyway), how could the LEO possibly justify confiscation? Doesn't the Fourth Amendment mean anything anymore?

Or is there more to the story...?
 
Florida law appears to take away a city legal tool "that would prevent people from shooting up their neighborhoods," Orr said Friday.

Wow a law prevents criminals from shooting up the neighborhood? Funny this would be first law that criminals actually obey. There are laws against robbery, burglary, car thefts, owning/possessing a gun, etc. but criminals don’t obey these laws.

According to a police report, the officer didn't arrest them because of the moratorium, but confiscated several weapons, including the rifle, which fires the same caliber round as an AK-47. Vega said police forwarded the case to the state attorney's office for possible future action.

First of all, on what grounds are the guns being confiscated if there was no crime committed? If it was illegal for the guys to have the guns then they should have been arrested for that crime. Otherwise, there is no reason to take weapons off of someone that hasn’t broken the law.

Secondly, I love the “guilt by association” tactic used to demonize the gun by saying it “fired the same caliber round as an AK-47.” Well guess what, some Remington 700s fire the same caliber round as the M60 machine gun.
 
According to a police report, the officer didn't arrest them because of the moratorium, but confiscated several weapons, including the rifle, which fires the same caliber round as an AK-47. Vega said police forwarded the case to the state attorney's office for possible future action.
Emphasis mine.

I don't know what happened, as I was not there, and I'm not very well versed on Florida law, but, I'll wager it is one of the following, or some combination thereof:

1. The reporter has no clue what he is talking about. Little facts like who gets charged, who gets indicted, what happens to evidence, etc routinely come out garbled. Don't believe anything you read in news report. Seriously.

2. Guns have a startling tendency to end up on the ground with no one willing to claim them when the police show up. I personally have rolled up on a corner, witnessed a half dozen gangbangers scatter, and found two Glocks and a Hi-Point laying in the grass. What are the cops supposed to do, auction them on the spot? (Note: that was a rhetorical question. If that sounded like a serious suggestion, you might be a gun nut. /Foxworthy) No, they get confiscated (and checked for stolen status).

3. Note the bold text above. Around here, that is called a future indictment. Basically, the suspect is cut loose, the evidence (Read: the gun) is placed in the property room, and the case is given to a Grand Jury to either indict or no-bill. In other words, a crime has occurred, the suspect was just not arrested on the spot. There are numerous reasons for doing this, the most germane to this discussion being some serious questions about the status of the law in question.

Mike
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top