Sharp as a Marble - Not only am I a felon

<< Man with a gun reported at a children’s museum in Tampa | Home | Looking for sponsors–An open letter to all firearm and firearm accessory manufacturers >>

Not only am I a felon

I Fear My Government , The Stupidity, it BURNS

I’m on the evening news committing the actual felony.

Now, I hear you saying “Robb, that’s ridonkulous. Nobody is going to press charges against you for shooting a gun in a gun range!” and you’d be wrong. The laws are not set up to protect the public, but to provide a mechanism so that no man or woman can exist without committing some crime. There is no way to rule innocent men and all.

So, my work with Florida Carry ends up rubbing some two-bit tyrant the wrong way, they have a laundry list of ‘crimes’ to charge me for. And this one is on video.

posted @ 7/25/2011 9:16:11 AM

Incoming Links

Don’t Worry Robb | Snowflakes in Hell on 7/25/2011 11:32:11 AM

Comments

alan says:

on 7/25/2011 10:51:26 AM

You're not a felon until you're convicted.

Tasso Rampante says:

on 7/25/2011 11:35:52 AM

You call that "wantonly"? Piffle. If you are cruising for a conviction, you're going to have to be more wanton.

Way more wanton. Like 50% more. At least.

chris says:

on 7/25/2011 11:58:16 AM

My little brother was charged with that in middle school for throwing a kumquat at a school bus.

Tasso Rampante says:

on 7/25/2011 12:04:38 PM

Now THAT's wanton. Maybe even malicious. Also delicious.

Robb Allen says:

on 7/25/2011 12:10:38 PM

You're not a felon until you're convicted.

Awww, isn't that cute? Alan still holds onto that quaint notion that you're innocent until proven guilty.

Divemedic says:

on 7/25/2011 1:09:16 PM

Misreading of the law. It says "wantonly or maliciously" this does not fit the legal definition of either.

See Golden v. State, 120 So. 2d 651 Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals (1st Dist. 1960)

also,

"Section 790.19, Florida Statutes (1983), is violated by a person who intentionally shoots at, within, or into a building for the primary purpose, or with the specific intent, of shooting at a person in or near the building, as well as by a person who shoots at, within, or into the building per se." Carter v. State, 469 So. 2d 775 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals (1st Dist. 1984)

John A says:

on 7/25/2011 1:45:52 PM

Divemedic, doesn`t your example case show that someone was prosecuted and the court found it necessary to re-define the wording of the statute?

Bruce H. says:

on 7/25/2011 2:02:36 PM

The laws are not set up to protect the public, but to provide a mechanism so that no man or woman can exist without committing some crime.

That's the main insight I got from reading Atlas Shrugged.

Sean Caranna says:

on 7/25/2011 2:49:20 PM

Golden v. State illustrates my point perfectly. Legislative intent can’t be ignored.
“The intent of the statute is obvious. It was enacted for the purpose of preserving the life and safety of anyone occupying a dwelling or other house, and to punish anyone who maliciously or wantonly shoots at or into such an occupied dwelling or house.” Golden v. State, 120 So. 2d 651 – Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 1st Dist. (1960). The court continues, “We are forced to conclude that the statute was never intended to apply to the factual situation presented by the evidence in this case.”
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=18135865123993249994&q=Golden+v.+State+1960&hl=en&as_sdt=4,10&as_vis=1

Regardless, my original post was about the importance of intent and the hazards of exploiting loopholes especially when you are trying to get the legislature to work with you.

Bubblehead Les says:

on 7/25/2011 3:44:54 PM

I'd make a comment, but I've found out the Hard Way not to associate with the Criminal Element, especially those who want to have Bare Arms in the Library!

divemedic says:

on 7/26/2011 8:18:02 PM

JohnA and Sean: Of course it shows that someone was prosecuted. That is the way case law is made. It also shows that the courts decided that the law did not apply in stupid cases like that.

The secret is that anyone can be prosecuted for anything, but not convicted. That is true any time there is a government, no matter how much power they have.

I think you guys need to loosen the tin foil a bit.

Comments have been closed on this topic.