FL gun law upheld by courts

Yes, you have previously stated this opinion, but you have not explained why you defend Conoco's lawyers for failing to present evidence to support their argument.

Because the plaintiffs lawyers were not arguing under the penn central test. I'm not saying that is wasn't a mistake, I'm just saying that its not the egregious error that you are making it out to be.

Either way however, this has no bearing on whether the company has a valid property right to assert. If anything, the bigger the mistake on the part of the lawyers makes is better for the argument since it was their negligence that cost them the case.
 
The only arguments raised by Defendants in the currently pending motions to dismiss are
(1) that the changes made to § 1289.7a of the OSDA in June of 2005 cure any vagueness problems
raised by Plaintiffs, and (2) that the Amendments do not amount to an unconstitutional taking in
light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980).
(See Defs.’ Obj. to Jurisdiction and Mot. to Dismiss TRO.) The Court has addressed both arguments
in ruling on Plaintiffs’ motions for permanent injunction.

This case is pretty much worthless for any sort Res Judicata. It fails to consider the amended law, and was not fully litigated. It was ruled on only on the conflict of law issue, and, the rest is dicta...
 
Hopefully, a higher court will overturn this new law. Property rights should trump this law and in my opinion, its defense, led by Marion Hammer, is way off track. Why burn goodwill with the public on such a divisive issue.
 
Problem is, if you look at Orlando, it's one of the crime capitals of Florida. Living and working there is not what I would consider 'fun'. It rates right up with two of the worst in the U.S., Richmond and Oakland, Kali.
I would not like leaving my gun at my house, nor in my car, with their theft rate. It's pretty much another city that proves no guns means high crime rates...
 
Back
Top