The five-member Okeechobee, Florida city council and Police Chief Donald Hagan may each be forced to pay $5,000 personally – without using taxpayer dollars – for violating Florida’s powerful preemption statute, which only allows the state legislature to regulate firearms.
As previously reported, the city adopted an illegal ordinance shortly before Hurricane Helene made landfall, which banned the sale of guns and ammunition and prohibited firearm possession in public by anyone other than law enforcement or members of the military.
After learning of the civil rights violation, Florida Carry, Inc. sent a demand letter titled Written Notice of Preemption Violation and Offer of Settlement, to the city council and Chief Hagan, warning the recipients they have violated Florida’s preemption statute.
The letter, which was written by Florida Carry, Inc. General Counsel Eric J. Friday, spelled out that the pro-gun group has sufficient standing to bring a lawsuit if the ordinance is not repealed within 30 days, and demanded the payment of $30,000 in damages and attorneys’ fees to “resolve this matter prior to initiation of litigation.”
Okeechobee City Attorney John J. Fumero, in a response sent Wednesday, claimed that the city’s Second Amendment violation was merely an “inadvertent mistake in using an outdated emergency ordinance form that, legally and factually, did not apply to the circumstances at hand regarding Hurricane Helene.”
Besides. Fumero wrote, no one ever enforced the illegal ordinance.
“At no time did the City, or the Police Chief, contemplate, nor take any action, to prohibit, confiscate or otherwise regulate firearms or ammunition in any fashion or manner. This was never the intention of the City. This was never implemented by the City. Moreover, to ensure this never happens again, the City has developed and implemented a new emergency ordinance form and process,” the city attorney wrote.
Fumero’s boss, Okeechobee Mayor Dowling R. Watford, Jr. and police spokesman Detective Jarret Romanello, gave numerous interviews to local media claiming city officials were reviewing the entire incident to determine how the “mistake” occurred. Romanello also claimed he looked forward to “providing more answers as soon as the review is complete.”
In his response, Fumero also balked at Florida Carry’s monetary demand.
“We see no legal, factual or public policy basis for your organization demanding payment of taxpayer dollars to satisfy your assertion of ‘damages and attorneys’ fees. The City is a rural small town that fundamentally believes in gun rights and the Second Amendment. From any standpoint, for Florida Carry, Inc. to take legal action against the City, under the circumstances described herein, is patently inappropriate and unjustified,” he wrote.
In an email reply to Fumero, Friday advised the city attorney to re-read Florida statute Sec. 790.33, which does not require actual enforcement of a preemption violation, since enactment itself is enough to prove liability.
“Inadvertence and ignorance of the law by government is no more of an excuse for violating civil rights than when a citizen ‘inadvertently’ violates the law and is arrested and prosecuted,” Friday wrote. “I will begin drafting my Complaint seeking relief, including personal fines against the city officials under whose jurisdiction this knowing and willful enactment occurred. You may want to inform the relevant officials that they are not allowed to use tax dollars to defend themselves from such liability, and that any fine assessed will be personally payable by them, to alleviate your concerns about tax dollars.”
Lee Williams is a board member of Florida Carry, Inc.
This story is courtesy of the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation to support pro-gun stories like this.
Yes! It’s about time some of these idiots become personally responsible.
👍
Go get em.
THIS! IS! THE! WAY!
Holding officials responsible for reprehensible official acts is the only way to stop them.
Holding these idiots personally responsible for their actions is the only way this type of stupidity will stop. AG Bonta and Gov. Gavin Newsom should be the next followed by by the entire Cali legislature. As a private citizen I will be held accountable for my actions, politicians need to held to the same consequence.
Meanwhile in the warning of ideas to come land of NY:
Legislation A7717B/S8589A allows police agencies instead of individual police officers to be listed as the petitioner in an ERPO proceeding.
So good luck holding anyone accountable for red flags gone awry ever.
Unfortunately, in California there is no law to hold politicians responsible for illegal laws they create. And good luck getting them to create such a law.
MS and FL both have the personal responsibility clause in our statutes that preclude using tax dollars. From memory there were several MS civil court judges, a couple of police chiefs, and at least one mayor that ended up being poorer. None in the last 5 years tho since the message got out. There’s likely a few other States that do it the same way.
Telling people your Constitutional Rights are null and void whether done purposely or by accident is serious enough for the azzhats to cough up some reparation moola peaceably or by court order.
This is why you need to be a member of your state 2A organization. I hope they squeeze these tryants for everything, they can get out of them. It will send a signal to the rest of the state of Florida.
Don’t f#ck with the second amendment.
SAF win in New York: h ttps://connect.xfinity.com/appsuite/#!!&app=io.ox/mail&folder=default0/INBOX
Obviously the wrong link, try this one:
h ttps://polo.feathr.co/view_email?cpn_id=67084b68ea6fd5df0b6375ee&t_id=67084b68ea6fd5df0b6375ef&per_id=65c4f5dcd7b2a2b36d6cf5f0
If I am reading it correctly it is more a confirmation of the stay issued a few years ago that got removed by the circuit court and later reversed. Still good to have it stacked on to keep pressure on the 2nd circuit with their multi year decision delay on every case in this topic.
Moderators will fail to post a word they don’t like but leave something that is clearly out of place.
“You may want to inform the relevant officials that they are not allowed to use tax dollars to defend themselves from such liability, and that any fine assessed will be personally payable by them, to alleviate your concerns about tax dollars.””
☝️Bang💥
So who gets the money?
Do the crime, pay the fine.
HUGE 2A WIN: NY’s “VAMPIRE RULE” DEFAULT CARRY BAN RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL .
United States District Court, Judge John Sinatra found that New York’s so-called vampire concealed carry default rule is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. Mark Smith, Four Boxes Diner, analyses the decision…
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymlr10BUmSA
Harris Blows Another Interview.
Kamala Harris attempted to do another interview. This time with 60 Minutes (interview linked below). The Vice President was bad, worse than usual … . She required a lot of post production help to make her answers look coherent and the interviewer was very soft- clearly attempting to help her.
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAua64FyX2U
60 Minutes & CBS Censoring Reaction Content on Failed Harris Interview.
… video about the poor performance Kamala Harris displayed during her attempted interview with 60 Minutes. The Vice President was bad, worse than usual … . She required a lot of post production help to make her answers look coherent and the interviewer was very soft- clearly attempting to help her. … CBS 60 Minutes has copyright claimed that work in an effort to suppress speech (of above video “Harris Blows Another Interview”.
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pi6O7vu7-c
They’re Already Playing Games in the Maryland Assault Weapon Ban Case.
Looks like Maryland is up to its old tricks again. This time trying to delay a Petition for REview by the United State Supreme Court by asking for an extension of time to file their response, FOR THE SECOND TIME. Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, .discusses the dirty little tricks that Maryland is playing in the hopes of avoiding review by the Supreme Court this term. This is just another in a very, very long line of dirty little tricks that have been played in this case for years.
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWg33rmeb0s
Election day terrorist plot tied to the CIA, but no one’s talking!
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVghdZX-Wsk
Theft & Brandishing Gun Leads To Shooting At Walgreens Leaving Suspect Dead. (Armed Suspect Shot by Concealed Carry Holder).
h ttps://regionnewssource.org/theft-brandishing-gun-leads-to-shooting-at-walgreens-leaving-suspect-dead/
“Fumero’s boss, Okeechobee Mayor Dowling R. Watford, Jr. and police spokesman Detective Jarret Romanello, gave numerous interviews to local media claiming city officials were reviewing the entire incident to determine how the ‘mistake’ occurred. Romanello also claimed he looked forward to “providing more answers as soon as the review is complete.”
1. The ‘government’ has a legal and moral and constitutional responsibility to ensure its actions are correctly based in factual and applicable law BEFORE issuing such things as this.
2. The police chief signed it.
3. Obviously, when dealing with civil liberty and civil right (the 2A is a civil liberty, but also a civil right was impacted here also), a ‘government’ has a constitutional, moral, and legal responsibility to make sure these are not infringed in any manner even ‘mistakenly’.
This was intentionally printed, cited, referenced, approved by the city council, and signed by the police chief.
Review complete.
1. There was no ‘mistake’ even if incompetence was in play. The intent was clearly, by action, to publish such an order for actual enactment even if it was not enforced and was in error. The city ‘government’ had a responsibility to make sure it was ‘accurate and correct’ BEFORE such action took place.
2. Had Florida Carry, Inc. not jumped on it when they did, it would have been in full force and would for a fact have continued to exist as an ‘infringement’ even if not enforced.
3. The very fact that it was intentionally printed, cited, referenced, approved by the city council, and signed by the police chief, even if not enforced or was a ‘mistake’, is a ‘deliberate’ act of infringement on a civil liberty and civil right and was for a fact a violation of state law.
Make them pay.
(note: The terms “civil rights” and “civil liberties” are often used interchangeably, but their meanings are different and distinct. Civil liberties are freedoms guaranteed to you by the Constitution to protect you from tyranny and give you protection from federal or state government actions. For example, the first 10 rights (and all rights) in the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution are civil liberties. Civil rights, in contrast, are the legal rights detailed in federal (and in some cases state) laws and statutes that protect you from discrimination or some other detrimental ‘government action something’ that can impact civil liberty. An example of a civil right is the right to be free from employment discrimination based on a protected factor such as, for example, race or disability.)
clarification for “or some other detrimental ‘government action something’ that can impact civil liberty.”
It doesn’t need to always be a government action, it can be a private sector action. For example: As an employee, you don’t have the legal (civil) right to a promotion because getting a promotion is not a guaranteed civil liberty. However, as a female employee, you have the legal (civil) right to be free from discrimination in being considered for that promotion, and legally can’t be be denied a promotion based on your gender or any other protected factor. By choosing not to promote a female worker solely based on gender, an employer commits a civil rights violation. In doing so, the employer engages in unlawful employment discrimination based on sex or gender, thus affecting a civil liberty under the 14th Amendment because the 14th Amendment equal protection clause provides the basis for civil rights against such discrimination.
So overall, Civil liberties concern the actual basic freedoms and Civil rights concern the treatment of a person regarding certain rights.
However, as a female employee, you have the legal (civil) right to be free from discrimination in being considered for that promotion, and legally can’t be be denied a promotion based on your gender or any other protected factor.
That’s Ok I guess…..but can I assume that a female employee CAN still be discriminated against if she makes a bad sammich?
Teaching my daughter about men, I told her she needs to be able to show respect, and a good way to do that is with a good sammich.
She’s a good kid, and she even uses that word appropriately.
Back in my home remodeling days, I was working in a kitchen while the wife made lunch for her second shift working husband. She dumped an awful amount of mustard on a chicken sandwich, commenting that he likes mustard on his chicken. That was not a sammich, and they were divorced within a year.
This is all kinda strange. So many people have their bloomers in a twist over Trump being convicted of fraud where no one suffered loss, yet, support prosecuting a case where no one was injured by a “civil rights violation”.
Isn’t a lawsuit over the premtion law violation a matter of “tort”, where damage or injury must be alleged? Where is the damage/injury that justifies “standing” to sue?
“Where is the damage/injury that justifies ‘standing’ to sue?”
The “damage/injury” is the fact the intentional action(s) its self to get it to the point of being issued and was issued, no matter if mistake or not or enforced or not, was a ‘government’ (city in this case) action intending to infringe and deny a civil liberty and civil right. That is ‘standing’.
The mere existence of a law is not damage/harm. The enforcement would create damage/injury.
How does one prove damage/harm as a result of not being willing to risk the results of enforcement? How does an individual “prove” a state of mind known to no one else?
Comments are closed.