Creating a disturbance which generated calls to the police for a man with a gun. Yes it was legal but if he stayed the calls would continue and they would have to keep going back out there.
Florida Fish and game warden knows and respects the law
- Thread starter Marine Cpl
- Start date
That is the entire point. I made a comment and you brought up about twenty different things besides that comment.
Doc8404
.450/400 Nitro Ex
What?
Not sure what you’re getting at.
he can’t say I’m placing you under arrest and tell him what charges they are??
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
And again. That’s the whole reason for doing this.The way it’s supposed to work is a sheeple calls for a man with gun while fishing. The cops say that’s a legal protected activity and if they decide to respond anyway and find no wrongdoing but rather a legal protected activity according to law, that’s the end of it.
And when they get another call 15 minutes later? Then they have to go back and do it all over again.. then about 15 minutes later.....
They cannot have half of the department showing up all day long. They also cannot ignore it or assume its the same guy with no bad intentions. Each call must be answered.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
They do not need to show up. Do they show up during hunting season when they see a man walking from his car alongside the road to a hunting area? It goes like this. Caller. Are you talking about the man fishing with a rifle? Yes. At the Titusville pier? Yes. He is legal to fish while open carrying. There is no crime committed.
You are out to lunch. They cannot ignore 911 calls about a man with a gun.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
What do you think would happen if callers continue to call about men with rifles walking along the road during hunting season?
spat
.700 Nitro Express
To be fair, the correct solution to those problems is *not* to harrass him for being a dick.
The correct solution is to eliminate the conditions that allow his little game to work.
When someone is dragging you into their stupid game, stop playing it.
If officers didn't continue to engage him he would just quit. Fishing for stuff to punish him for being a dick, is exactly the same asshole move you are complaining about him pulling.
This is a case of both sides being more interested in "winning" than doing what's right.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
What authority do they have to revoke his authorization to be there ?
It seems like something like that would have to come from someone in charge of the park, not just some random cop.
They can't just order him around because they don't like him.
Its in the law that a police officer can trespass you without needing the owner to do it. It was also backed up by court and an appeals court in a separate case.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
So, since these guts decided he needed to be "adjusted" because they didn't like his attitude, could they just follow him around all day and keep ordering him to leave every place he was at ?
What if he just went from one fishing spot to another all day ?
You'd have to take that up with the district court and court of appeals and also the legislature that enacted the laws. I cannot help you. I suppose if he stopped doing things that generate 911 calls he could go where he wishes to fish and not have any issues. But he wasn't really there to catch fish anyway.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Incorrect. I proved that to be false to you.
The law text literally says they can trespass someone. It is not up for a debate. That's exactly what they did. All 10 of them. Dont ya think if they couldn't do that someone would have spoken up? Do you really think they just gave him a trespass warning that they weren't allowed to? If their actions were not lawful why would they give him proof of that action in writing? Take off your tinfoil hat and relax. And dont generate 911 calls if you want to be left alone. There is a difference between what is right and decent and what is legal.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
No it does not. I told you to quote the law and you could not. The first one is for a conveyance. He did not fit that criteria. The second one was in other places but a crime or intent of a crime has to be committed. He did not fit that one as well.
This is what you do. It is explained to you and you act like it isn’t. Then 8 posts later, you say the same thing.
Break it down for us how he fits into 810.09.
810.09 Trespass on property other than structure or conveyance.—
(1)(a) A person who, without being authorized, licensed, or invited, willfully enters upon or remains in any property other than a structure or conveyance:
1. As to which notice against entering or remaining is given, either by actual communication to the offender or by posting, fencing, or cultivation as described in s. 810.011; or
2. If the property is the unenclosed curtilage of a dwelling and the offender enters or remains with the intent to commit an offense thereon, other than the offense of trespass,
commits the offense of trespass on property other than a structure or conveyance.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
And you are funny for thinking someone would have spoken up. How naive can that though actually be. Right’s are violated everyday.
Tell me something. Would the trespass be legal if the cops didn’t like that he was fishing with a Trump hat on?
I bet you won’t answer honestly.
Tell me something. Would the trespass be legal if the cops didn’t like that he was fishing with a Trump hat on?
I bet you won’t answer honestly.
nortatoga
.338 Win Mag
You left out 2C !!!!
#1 ding ding ding "willfully remains" after "actual communication" not to. It says no such thing of having to commit a second crime for it to apply. You just defeated yourself. You saying something doesn't make it true or valid. Your opinions are your own. They do not discredit anyone.
Also you are posting trespass laws. He was NOT charged with trespass. He was warned to leave.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
2C doesn’t apply unless 1 and 2 are met. Did you go to school? Same as NY gun laws. If It isn’t semiautomatic with a detachable magazine listed in 1, the features listed in A, B, C, and so forth do not apply.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Again. You cannot be trespassed for any reason whatsoever from a public place. How many times does that have to be explain to you? That is why you will ignore my question on whether a police officer can trespass you for wearing a trump hat or for being gay or from being black or for wearing a red shirt.
Again, you "explaining" something does not give it any credit or relevance. It is merely your opinion based on a 5 minute google search of another states laws. You have no authority or qualification to speak on the matter. Only offer your opinions.
As for your made up far reaching hypotheticals, I would say if those actions did not generate 911 calls requiring many many officers to rush to the scene then there would be no cause to ask the person to leave. That is what happened here and that is why the warning to leave was issued. Move on.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
I mean how ignorant could you possibly be? Why would they make a law making open carry legal while fishing but the act of doing so is subject to trespass? We really have some rocket scientists here. People that cannot read basic English and know that in order for a trespass to be committed, conditions 1 or 2 have to be met in such trespass law.
Last edited:
You dont get it. The warning was issued. If he continued to stay he is in violation of #1. He left therefore no arrest was made. He was not charged with anything. He was asked to leave.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
It’s not an opinion. It’s a fact. You cannot trespass someone from a public place for any reason whatsoever. That’s a violation of civil rights.
Did you see the Miami case where the same happened? The second time they cops were forced to let it happen.
Why are you defending the violations of rights on a gun forum anyway? That’s a disgrace.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
No you don’t get it. You cannot be trespassed for the performance of a legal act backed up by the law that says you can do that act in public where you have a right to be at. What don’t you understand about that? What don’t you understand that none of the trespass conditions were met in both Florida trespass laws.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Dude you are being disgraceful defending 2A tyranny here. This is how an interaction is supposed to go.
masterswimmer
.450/400 Nitro Ex
Damn, this shit is getting old. You guys argue back and forth, purportedly knowing what the law cites, means, should be interpreted as, and how it should be applied and enforced, regarding this, that or the other thing.
When a case is accepted by SCOTUS it is because a Constitutional law was supposedly not followed and appeals failed. Sounds cut and dry, doesn't it? Hell, the Constitution says it in black and white (or black and yellow (lamb skin) for all you who want to argue again). Yet when rulings come down from SCOTUS (the supreme court of the land with the most elite Constitutional scholars) there is always a decision one way or the other with hardly ever any unanimous decisions. Why? How can this happen? It says X, Y and Z in the Constitution so there must be zero conflict, no debate and unequivocal agreement. Even our Supreme Court Justices don't agree on Constitutional law. We're always reading about the dissenters to the decision handed down. How the hell do you non lawyers, non Constitutional scholars think you're going to ever convince each other you're right?
The arguments are ad infinitum.
AIN'T. HAPPENIN'. BABY!
When a case is accepted by SCOTUS it is because a Constitutional law was supposedly not followed and appeals failed. Sounds cut and dry, doesn't it? Hell, the Constitution says it in black and white (or black and yellow (lamb skin) for all you who want to argue again). Yet when rulings come down from SCOTUS (the supreme court of the land with the most elite Constitutional scholars) there is always a decision one way or the other with hardly ever any unanimous decisions. Why? How can this happen? It says X, Y and Z in the Constitution so there must be zero conflict, no debate and unequivocal agreement. Even our Supreme Court Justices don't agree on Constitutional law. We're always reading about the dissenters to the decision handed down. How the hell do you non lawyers, non Constitutional scholars think you're going to ever convince each other you're right?
The arguments are ad infinitum.
AIN'T. HAPPENIN'. BABY!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
The messed up thing is that you have people here arguing in support of 2A right’s violations when Florida law is clear cut and says that you can. This isn’t a SCOTUS issue. Florida law says that you can below.
m.flsenate.gov
Only in NY will you have people argue against gun rights. I cannot wait to leave this state. 9 years cannot come soon enough to get away from indoctrinated people used to having their rights violated and fighting for them to continue to be violated.
Chapter 790 Section 25 - 2024 Florida Statutes
m.flsenate.gov
Only in NY will you have people argue against gun rights. I cannot wait to leave this state. 9 years cannot come soon enough to get away from indoctrinated people used to having their rights violated and fighting for them to continue to be violated.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
He was fishing for sure, and those cops took the bait hook line and sinker.
If I was managing a store and my employees let some douchebag bait them into a confrontation like that they would not be working there long. We should expect better from our police.
Also, you're saying that we can just make enough 911 calls and get the next BLM rally shutdown too, or does that only work on conservative causes ?