Florida Open Carry Activist Assaulted by Miami Beach Police

Arizona -(Ammoland.com)- Michael Taylor is an open carry and Second Amendment activist. On June 24th, about 10 a.m., he and a number of friends were legally open carrying in Florida, while fishing on a Miami Beach pier. They are members of Florida Open Carry, and had notified the Miami Beach Police Department, by letter and telephone, that they would be open carrying at the pier, in advance. A letter notifying the Miami Beach Police Department and the City Attorney was sent on June 7th, 2018. A phone call was made the day of the event, hours in advance.

At first, an unidentified Park Ranger told them they had to leave the pier because they were openly carrying. They corrected the Park Ranger and showed him the statute that preserved the right to open carry while fishing, hunting or camping.

The Park Ranger is heard to mention something about Michael's afro haircut.

An unidentified Park Ranger told them they had to leave the pier because they were openly carrying
An unidentified Park Ranger told them they had to leave the pier because they were openly carrying

The park ranger left the area and called in the Miami Beach Police Department.

The Miami Beach Police arrived on the scene with guns drawn, rapidly advancing on Michael Taylor and his friends. The Florida open carry group had not done anything threatening, rude, or aggressive. They were simply fishing while exercising their Second Amendment rights. All of them, regardless of color or ethnicity, were handcuffed, disarmed, and searched.

The Miami Beach Police arrived on the scene with guns drawn, rapidly advancing on Michael Taylor and his friends.
The Miami Beach Police arrived on the scene with guns drawn, rapidly advancing on Michael Taylor and his friends.

Michael Taylor protested the heavy-handed tactics and told the officers that he was not relinquishing any of His Fourth, Fifth, First, and Second Amendment rights, and that he was not giving any consent to search anything.

In most jurisdictions, it is aggravated assault to point a gun at someone without legal justification. In this case, I fail to see any legal justification for the drawn firearms in the hands of police. The police compounded their bad position by handcuffing the open carriers without any reasonable suspicion of illegal activity.

Michael repeatedly asked why they were being detained. The officers refused to say. Eventually, one officer came up with an often rendered excuse, when no crime is known. “Officer safety”. But the open carriers complied with the officer's orders never touched their guns, and never threatened the officers. Courts have ruled the mere presence of a firearm is not enough to disarm someone for “officer safety”.

The screenshot shows him just before he covered the camera.
The screenshot shows him just before he covered the camera.

Michael had put his phone on the pier to facilitate video recording while the assault was occurring. One of the officers noticed the phone and stopped the video recording by covering the camera. The screenshot shows him just before he covered the camera.

Link to Youtube of Open Carry and Police interaction at Miami Beach

The Miami Beach park ranger, the Miami Beach Police Department officers and the police chief, may be personally liable for violating Florida preemption law in this case. The law has a provision for willful and knowing violation of citizens rights in this area. The decision by the park ranger and the police officers to ignore the law, when presented with it by Michael Taylor, and the written notice given to the police three weeks prior to the event and hours before the event on May 24th, could easily rise to the level of knowing and willful violation of the law.

Here are the appropriate sections of the Florida preemption law. From leg.stat.fl.us:

(b) If any county, city, town, or other local government violates this section, the court shall declare the improper ordinance, regulation, or rule invalid and issue a permanent injunction against the local government prohibiting it from enforcing such ordinance, regulation, or rule. It is no defense that in enacting the ordinance, regulation, or rule the local government was acting in good faith or upon advice of counsel.

(c) If the court determines that a violation was knowing and willful, the court shall assess a civil fine of up to $5,000 against the elected or appointed local government official or officials or administrative agency head under whose jurisdiction the violation occurred.

(d) Except as required by applicable law, public funds may not be used to defend or reimburse the unlawful conduct of any person found to have knowingly and willfully violated this section.

(e) A knowing and willful violation of any provision of this section by a person acting in an official capacity for any entity enacting or causing to be enforced a local ordinance or administrative rule or regulation prohibited under paragraph (a) or otherwise under color of law shall be cause for termination of employment or contract or removal from office by the Governor.

(f) A person or an organization whose membership is adversely affected by any ordinance, regulation, measure, directive, rule, enactment, order, or policy promulgated or caused to be enforced in violation of this section may file suit against any county, agency, municipality, district, or other entity in any court of this state having jurisdiction over any defendant to the suit for declaratory and injunctive relief and for actual damages, as limited herein, caused by the violation. A court shall award the prevailing plaintiff in any such suit:

1. Reasonable attorney’s fees and costs in accordance with the laws of this state, including a contingency fee multiplier, as authorized by law; and

2. The actual damages incurred, but not more than $100,000.

Police chief Daniel Oates comments after the release of the legal open carriers and Second Amendment supporters practically screams of willful and knowing violation of the law. The law was passed, in part, exactly to protect against such violations of Constitutional rights. From the miamiherald.com:

Miami Beach Police Chief Daniel Oates said, “Given the current climate, if six people show up to to a pier in South Beach carrying guns, our citizens expect us to respond promptly and address any potential danger. We did so, and I am confident our officers acted appropriately.”

That may prove to be an expensive comment by Chief Oates. Ignoring clear notice of intent to exercise rights, willful refusal to read the law when given clear opportunity to do so, assaulting peaceful citizens merely because they were exercising their rights. These all seem to be things Chief Oates heartily approves of.

Will Miami Beach compound the offense by using public funds to defend against a lawsuit in this case?  I suspect they will claim that the offense was not “knowing and willful”. The prior notices, by letter and telephone, and the unwillingness of the officers to even consider the law, work against that interpretation.

Florida Open Carry is preparing a lawsuit.

©2018 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch


About Dean Weingarten:Dean Weingarten

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

  • 81 thoughts on “Florida Open Carry Activist Assaulted by Miami Beach Police

    1. sounds like this bunch belonged at Parkland shooting & Las Vegas where the first on the scene stood back an done nothing .maybe if the guys had their weapons drawn they would have ducked for cover .

        1. Sorry but the link did not post twice. Third time is a charm I guess, here goes Best Open Carry Stop Ever: . Although nothing happened imo it’s the 2A guys whom did not show or share enough courtesy.

        2. MIO – I drive to Miami Beach Fri nite. My wife and I fished off of a pier, she with a HK VP9 and I with a Para P-14 both openly carried. No one bothered us at all – I suppose an 83 year old male and a 79 year old lady “packing heat” don’t appear to be the same type of threat that six rifle toting younger fellows seemed to. The nice young Park ranger spoke to us and checked our fishing licenses, but mentioned nothing about our sidearms. Go figure.

    2. If this gentleman or the others had possibly done something wrong or had committed a crime, then and only THEN would silence be the proper response before needing counsel.
      The escalation in this incident was ALL on poor LEO judgement and action. I completely support the thin blue-line but I do not support the bloated egos and ignorance of those that make the others look terribly bad. Those others that are attacked or killed blindly due to those bloated abusive egos and ignorance of disgraceful LE.

    3. @Jon L: I concur fully. You have the right to be silent or not to be silent. If was his and everyone else’s right to open carry and exercise that right. Remember ‘rights’ get flabby and tossed when not used!

    4. To Roy D- while I appreciate the congrats, they are not necessary. I have only tried to live my life doing what I believe to be right, both morally and ethically. When I enlisted at 16 I really expected that I would give my life in the service of my country. When I lived through 4 years of service I just decided to continue to serve in a capacity I knew how to handle. Re-enlisting during our “conflict in SE Asia was an easy decision. Again, congrats are truly not required, I just did what I believed was right. And I still aspire to that.

    5. I live in south Florida
      I think we should have this open carry fishing event every weekend until Miami Beach gets tired of harassing law abiding open carriers.
      It would normalize open carry of guns while fishing car more than this one time event

      1. Excellent idea with maximum potential in desensitizing today’s society of what was common in this country for well over 200 years! This may also encourage the gun-shy and complacent citizens to want to step-up to a firing range to learn gun safety and test their skills?

      2. Hi Docduracoat- that is a FANTASTIC idea! I’ll see you on the pier next Saturday. I’ll be the 83 year old totin’ the Garland.

      3. @Docduracoat:
        I wish I lived close by, I would be right there with you every Saturday. I am with you in spirit. I think the cops should have hung out on the pier and informed the public that what is happening is not against the law. Instead of violating the law themselves.

    6. The lawsuit, at least in part, is against the police department.

      The department had constructive, advanced, notice of the event in the form of a letter mailed a couple of weeks before the event – the fact that the department may plead incompetence in not reading the letter, or not passing the informational on to the individual police officers, that are the police departments employees, is no legal defense for the police department.

      The individual police officers may have a defense – but the police department will have none.

      The police department will be money, and public relations, ahead by admitting wrong doing and entering a consent decree not to do it again.

      But it is not the police department managers money – so the town may need to fire someone if they make the wrong decision.

      1. Florida OPEN Carry, DO NOT SETTLE FOR CRUMBS AT THIS POINT after all you have done in the name of LIBERTY!

        It would be proper to include the State of Florida from the governors’ office on down in this suit as Florida and all associated, “Emergency Management” agencies and law enforcement entities have ALL been made aware of Florida citizen’s 2A rights in regards to the extremely liberal RIGHTS of citizen’s to carry OPEN or CONCEALED in a vast array,of areas in Florida to include businesses, parks and so many publicly funded areas. So much that ALL who heard the 911 dispatches that day KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN. that Florida Open Carry fishermen were within their RIGHTS and any one of them could have alerted the responding officers from Parks and Wildlife on down. These very issues are even archived in the Florida press!

        IT IS THIER JOB TO KNOW THESE SIMPLE FACTS!

    7. The entire incident would have been much more effective if the individual filming it would’ve kept his comments to a minimum. Less his shoulder issues, the majority of his other comments did little to nothing to promote their agenda.

      When dealing with law enforcement, it’s almost always better to say as little as necessary. Less to want to be later defending such comments in court.

      Merely speaking from experience.

      1. You missed the whole point, here. He PURPOSELY kept his “comments” to a maximum, for a wide range of obvious, strategical reasons, which was actually brilliant on his part. Just because you may not agree with his methods, or wished he would have used your suggested meek, keep silent as possible, strategy, means absolutely nothing. Every single thing this brave young man said and did for this cause was perfectly legal and necessary, and well within his rights as a law abiding American citizen to do so, in order to help expose this injustice and to show the incompetency of all the various local government offices and personnel at all levels, there (possibly uncovering their racial prejudice, as well). I’m a 59 year old, pro Second Amendment, Anglo American citizen who is totally disappointed and embarrassed by what is shown in this video. He should be applauded for this with a sense of gratitude from every American citizens who cares about our American rights and freedoms.

    8. Cops overreacted…exactly why I carry concealed. Open carry is asking for a reaction from the public or police. It also makes you the first target if something were to go down. “Bad guys” & police don’t know I am armed for those very reasons.

      1. I’m a different Jon (I’ll post as Jon L from now on)… the one who replied to Brad, just above your comment here. But, since I’m here, I’ll say the same thing I said to Brad… you, too, have missed the point. These brave fellas did all of this ON PURPOSE! Yes, everything you mentioned above, about when you conceal carry and why you do so, is simple common knowledge … nothing profound there. These young men had an agenda and had the guts to expose ignorance of the law, even from those who are paid to protect the law… ALL LAWS, regardless of public uncomfortability. They took on an endeavor to provide a teachable moment for all to witness… LEGALLY, which is their right to do so. And, I, for one, thank them for putting themselves through all that.

        1. I realize it was on purpose Mr. L, hence the “cops overreacted” comment. Imo, just better ways of going about it that don’t give the anti 2a bastards more “ammo.” I mean the guys wife told him what would happen…she was unfortunately correct.

          1. I give up… He said that about his wife (her knowing what would happen if her husband went fishing in Florida while in open carry mode) as a “dig” to the officers, to make a point, in effect saying that even an innocent housewife has the common sense to know that this would be mishandled by incompetent authorities there in Florida. You’re taking his little “dig” at the officers too literal and giving it too much importance. She did not make some big revelation that nobody else was aware of or didn’t know what was going to possibly happen. Every single person there discussed every single possible outcome to this endeavor, exhaustively, before they went to that pier to go fishing, and they came absolutely prepared for anything and everything. When he told that officer about what his wife said, in no way did he mean that, “Dammit, my wife guessed it right on the money about how you fools would react. I should have listened to her and come better prepared, or just not come at all.” That’s NOT what he meant. You have to have a little “street smarts” (and “legal smarts,” too: forcing the cops to say things they shouldn’t have BECAUSE of his annoying banter) to understand exactly why he said and did exactly every little thing. He PURPOSELY kept his “comments” to a maximum, for a wide range of obvious, strategical reasons, which was actually brilliant on his part. And, I, for one, thank them for putting themselves through all that.

            1. That is a whole lot of words for “I give up.” Definitely not taking time to read all that…better stuff to do. Btw, thank you for reminding me why I stopped posting on articles like this. Unsubscribe…thanks for playing.

          2. When I said I give up, of course, I meant it as an expression (a figure of speech) and a verbal tactic to convey frustration, just exactly in the same way the young man used the line about his wife’s warning… as a “dig” to the officers. It’s very Interesting that you focused on that, and then decided to adhere to your policy of meek silence and just totally (and actually) give in, give up, and unsubscribe, so easily. I smell a rat here (not literally, as I now know how you tend to think) about you. Something is just not right or 2A American in your behavior, thinking, and ill-advised comments. I just can’t quite put my finger on it, but I know there’s something going on with You. You mentioned that this experience here reminds you how you always get treated in other blogs the same way, as well. Now, THAT speaks VOLUMES. So, it IS YOU, then. Just think if these boys here (or any good American for that matter) had your …SHUT UP & GIVE UP… attitude. Where do you think we’d be as a country, or would we even BE a country would be a better question, if ANYBODY thought and acted like you propose and show? And, if you think for one second that I believe that you did not read my last reply to you in its entirely (even though you did reply back) because you have better things to do, then you really are full of it. Btw, remember the brave American men and women, both military and civilian, whose actions like this fought for you to be able to “have better things to do.” They weren’t meek, mild, and silent when needed, I guarantee you that!

    9. My comments being on a leftist forum!?! Lol
      You don’t even know what they were because of censorship. I’m a pro 2A LEO. I believe in less gun control than most of you based on comments.
      The comments covered both sides of wrong and what needs to be fixed. I fully recognize that it needs fixed ON BOTH SIDES.
      I guess the 1st only counts when it’s fits the desire though. The best part is reading the comments with zero basis that aren’t censored.
      Leftist lol wow yeah you nailed it Gunny

      1. MIO I have read and reread your comments and replys several times and the only reply I ever took issue with was your reply re: the forum reposting this article because they did not recieve enough responses or comments. I have not seen any evidence of censorship of any if my own post s or replys so cannot comment on the validity of your claim.
        Based upon the info in this article and after delving into newspaper accounts (?!) of the incident I truly believe the response by LEOs was wrong. It could have/should have been handled in s far more productive manner. Public opinion of LEO suffered tremendously due to the manner in which it was handled. Of that there can be no doubt. A prudent response after receiving the notifications listed in the article would have been to assign two or three officers to observe the gathering in order to ensure everyone’s safety.
        I personally do not open carry even though it is my right to do so in the state where I reside. Residing in CA while growing up I obtained my CCL as soon as I was legally allowed to do do and have carried concealed ever since. I carried openly only while in the service of our country, and during the time I spent with LAPD.. I am an NRA Life Memberas well as a member of most other Pro2A groups in the nation. Certified firearms safety instructor, competitive shooter, and believe that all law abiding citizens should be allowed to own, carry and use any and all firearms. They are a tool with many purposes. My reading of the 2A is that law abiding citizens should never be restricted as to method or choice if what to carry of how. I do have to draw the line at nukes and unattended anti personnel devices as these are not selective as to who they injure or kill. I gave a very good friend who owns and flies a fighter jet which has had its armament completely removed or diemilled. As a former fighter pilot it is something he thoroughly enjoys. It is the same with me and class 3 firearms. I really enjoy owning and firing them. Well, except for the cost and red tape hassle involved. I do feel that had proven themselves worthy of the trust required to safely use these to use such weapons safely should be allowed that freedom. And NFA of 1934 does that to an extent. Guns are quite controversial simply because of the inherent danger and responsibility of ownership which they bring with them. They will always be that way, there’s just no getting around that fact. They are already HIGHLY regulated- more so than any other dangerous commodity- and HIGHLY restricted. At this point in our history there are so many bout there teaching only the dangers involved with them s group such as Florida Open Carry trying to lift public awareness from that “scaredy-cat” mentality is a breath of fresh air.

        1. Gunny1951: Why this site does it I don’t know; but, I have seen and commented on this site bringing back an article that had already been discussed thoroughly. A couple of times in the “Ammunition” forum I believe it was because they didn’t care for the less than favorable response to the product being hawked.
          Other times, comments just didn’t show up on various topics. This used to bother me but now I just chuckle and shake my head. Life is too short to sweat the small stuff. I take it by your moniker that you are four years older than I am.

          1. Hi Roy D- thanks for clarifying that. I suppose I missed the article the first time it was run. I try not to judge the site itself except on merits of the articles written. I always make an attempt to verify the info written before posting comments, doesn’t always work out for the best, but I try to retain an open mind when reading other posts.
            I was born 1935. You?

    10. First of all, I do believe that any non-criminal citizen has the right to carry, either open or concealed, however these guys went to that pier expecting to get a reaction from the authorities. His wife “warned him” about going down there. They had cameras and literature. Not sure how this really helps gun owners. I also believe that the cops could have handled it differently. The facts are that they do not know these guys or their ultimate intent. It is the authorities obligation to determine that intent. Both sides are complicit in making this thing a cluster f—.

      1. Taj the pd had been informed of the activists intentions well in advance and absolutely should have placed officers on the scene to protect THE ADVICATES and the public should anyvtype of incident ensued. In no way did Miami Beach PD respond properly in this case.
        Addressing the comments re: the cost of defending these officers and the PD the law is explicit and extremely clear- they are REQUIRED to handle their own defense funds. Any judge who allows them to use taxpayer time and funds for this case is also explicitly included by becoming complicit in their illegal actions. Said judge becomes liable for disbarment and removal from the bench. All members of the PD who participated are required by law to lose all pension, retirement and be forced to pay any and all legal fees for the complainants, plus any punitive damage awards- up to $100,000 each. There should be no plea down, or out of court settlement here. Doing either of these would show the bias of the court and be absolute proof that we have already entered deeply into an age of tyranny.
        The complete statute was printed in the article. There is no wiggle room built into it. The statute has been contested and upheld several times and found to be totally and completely constitutional each time. If these men are willing to see this through they will be very well off financially and “we the people” will be much better off for their efforts. We need to get behind them 100%.

      2. @Taj, I believe three weeks notice by letter & several hours notice previous by phone would constitute the police knowing their intent (which was not required, mind you)…which was probably to bring awareness to the public of our 2A rights. A wife’s objection hardly constitutes an intentional expectation of confrontation with the cops. They had cameras & literature…and? The only facts are, they were within their legal rights, according to Florida law, to openly carry while fishing & they were prepared to discuss this action with anyone that showed a curiousity. It’s the authority’s obligation to know their own laws, not harass those legally exercising their rights. Would you like the “authorities” breathing down your neck for legally exercising your 1st. amendment right to write such a load of crap…just because they don’t know your intent? I hope not! You have a right to your opinion. The only cluster, was from the Miami Police Department…& the park ranger.

      3. “expecting to get a reaction”

        Who wouldn’t? I always go out expecting that. It didn’t happen so far, but I expecting it every time.

        “His wife “warned him” about going down there.”

        My wife warned me about starting my own business. My wife warned me about buying a house. Yet we have a nice house and our only earning is what I make by running my business. Wives can warn about anything.

        “They had cameras”

        Why wouldn’t they have cameras? But they used their phone to record the video. It’s in the article. Having a cellphone is not that special nowadays. Pretty much everyone has cells.

        “and literature”

        And they should have that with them.

        “The facts are that they do not know these guys or their ultimate intent.”

        Facts, that cops don’t know if a car driver is just riding a car or wants to drive in a mob and kill people. Yet, they can’t arrest every single driver just because “they don’t know the drivers and their ultimate intent”.

        If you don’t break the law, you shouldn’t get arrested. It’s not that complicated.

      4. @Taj, being that the Constitution of the United States was signed in 1787, I would suffice it to say that the local police department in Miami had plenty of advance notice of the Second Amendment?

        As for the idiot with the state parksas well as the police officers involved, I expect to see them all working at a local Walmart soon.

        Florida Open Carry? Although I believe that the city of Miami is going to want to quickly settle this matter out of court, unless they too are that damn stupid, just be sure to make your DONATION button for any legal defense funds prominantly posted on your website so that people can easily find it and donate funds for your cause. Wish I were there! Semper Fidelis!

    11. In answer to the closing question of ” Will the Miami police use public funds to defend a law suit”, who else’s funds are likely to be used, certainly not the funds of the officers involved. As to the rest of it, before being turned loose on the public, police officers should be required to demonstrate basic knowledge and understanding of the law. In this case, knowledge, understanding and perhaps more important, respect for the law were among the missing.

    12. Thus reminds me of incidents which occurred nationally back in the 1960’s and 70’s when Black Panther movement attempted to intimidate voters by open carrying outside of polling places. LE was prevented from intervening due to the possibility of civil rights violations. While I did not like their actions, I supported their right to carry.It appears that those civil rights no longer have any value.
      Be careful what you wish for, you may not like the final outcome.

    13. If you are in the business of enforcing the law, you should know the law. Or at least be able to read it. I think a $5000.00 (personal) fine is appropriate for each public servant involved..

    14. It is apparent that the police in this area are ignorant buffoons. I would think it would be incumbent on any police officer to know the laws if they are going to enforce them. The advance notification of where and when the group would be should have been enough, but that assumes the information was shared. Still, the police broke the law and should be held accountable, but this brings up the plight of the average citizen, without money to prosecute them in court, they cannot. This is how the state gets away with victimizing its citizens. It costs a lot of money to fight for your rights these days, and I doubt the ACLU will even look at this, as they are anti-gun.

    15. Pretty obviously (at least to me) Miami Beach PD decided in advance to use this effort to increase public awareness of 2A rights by the open carry advocate group as an opportunity to make a point of their own. Namely-we ARE the law and you have NO choice but to surrender your rights to us. The Gestapo tactics they employed were used to instill fear and intimidate the activists.
      Hopefully all government employees will be prosecuted to the extent of the law as written. Send them a CLEAR message- law abiding citizens will NOT be fearful nor intimidated by thugs in uniforms.

    16. @MIO: If all you have is a “throw away” comment then that’s exactly what we’ll do with it. Otherwise back up your claim with facts. Oh, sorry, let me make that clear for you, put up or shut up.

      1. It was neither for nor against you. It stated fact. It gave both sides. Yes there is a problem. Yes it needs fixed. No it didn’t need that go down the way it did.
        Your no better for censorship than the left. Not liking it didn’t change the facts.

    17. Missouri Born says:
      July 11, 2018 at 8:06 AM
      “If these guys were trying to prove a point about Florida law they should have brought an Attorney with them for their defense”,
      @Missouri Born: So you are saying that a person expressing their Constitutional Rights should bring an attorney with them to prove they have that right. You are a complete *******. And probably a liberal. The Constitution is the only reason we are not a police state right now. This is not a third world country, and you do not have a say in what is my right. These THUGS violated their oath, to protect the citizens of their jurisdictions. The Chief wanted to make a political statement that he does not like the 2nd Amendment, and he is willing to violate their rights to prove it. These officers can go to jail for using their authority to carry out an unlawful order from their Chief.

      1. Hate to burst your bubble but we are living in a police state right now with the constitution being trampled and ignored multiple times daily nationwide.

        1. Craig, I think you are right. Since 9/11 we are in a police state. I am a retired LEO, and it really changed that day for the worse.

    18. I would expect the Miami Beach Police to lie lie lie in this one. I have seen in my own town police lie to cover their illegal activity. I also want to point out that “officer safety” is mission number one in any police activity. The publics safety always is secondary. Individual heroics by officer are always in conflict with police standard procedures. The police cannot and in most cases will not protect you. You are the first responder in any assault situation. The police are the second responders. Shouldn’t you as first responder be at least as well armed as the second responder? Of course you should.

      1. Of course, let’s not exercise Rights lest they offend someone. You might want to observe your own philosophy when it comes to free speech. Geez, some of it is just not very smart and doesn’t advance the cause of freedom for all. Or perhaps you’d like to apply that to religion? Best not practice it too openly for fear of offending someone. You know how the open display of the cross sends some people over the top.

        I believe the Founders would have been repulsed by your views. Florida’s laws on open carry are an anathema to freedom everywhere. I hope sovereign immunity is pierced and and officers and Chief are found guilty of Civil Rights violations and false arrest. And I say that as a retired LEO. This attitude of we are the “only ones” has to stop and the only way it will stop is when the courts, very strongly, through monetary fines and, in some cases imprisonment, that violation of individual Rights will not be tolerated.

      2. SB short term it may not have helped gun owners. We are in a fight to protect and preserve our 2A rights- granted by God not the government. Short term viewpoints and submission to the SMALL STEPS taken by anti-2A “liberals” has proven to be the wrong method of action. This confrontation-Planned and executed by Miami Beach PD is just one more of those small steps designed to cause 2A supporters and defenders to retreat and surrender. If we are to return to being a free people we cannot give an inch. Gun control advocates have already declared their true intent to completely disarm the citizens- law abiding or otherwise. The purpose is full control- not freedom. An armed populace cannot be effectively controlled. Our founders knew this and realizing this to be true wisely included the second amendment protecting the God-Given right for the people to arm and protect their posterity from becoming enslaved by an empirical, controlling government as well as defending themselves, their homes and family from bad people. Learn from history ancient and recent, or submit, surrender and become enslaved.
        Stay vigilant- the enemy is at the gate.

      3. SB your comment belies your attitude and belief system. The proper statement of fact is not “display” but rather “carry”. The uniformed thugs exhibited a total disregard for the law they took an oath to uphold, as well as The Constitution of the United States of America. They should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law as written, showing no favoritism for the uniform. The law is very specific concerning the methods used to oay fir their defense, as well as any and all fines and compensation levied- that being ig comes out of their own pockets not the taxpayers. It allows for prosecution for violations of those components of the law as well. Very succinctly I might add.
        Over the past three decades I have witnessed s marked shift in behavior and actions taken by those sworn to uphold the law. They seem to be bent on a course toward fascist ideology, but when confronted with these observations take great offense, in many cases claiming “Jewish heritage” as if that somehow proves that their actions are being misconstrued. I’m sorry, but that is not the case. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, looks like a duck, it’s most likely a duck! Or in this case, a jackbooted thug.

      4. SB, your comment disparaging one’s exercise of their God-given right to whatever is not a very smart move, and does not help rughts advocates. Not the place for such open display of ignorance or foollishness… nor even corruption.

        I suppose you would have said the same thing to Rosa Parks on that bus back in Birmingham…..

        1. Tionoco I agree with everything in your comment/reply to SB. However there is a HUGE distinction between the comparison you alluded to regarding Rosa Parks’ civil disobedience and the Activist group assaulted in Miami Beach. That distinction? Her act of defiance was against the law at the time she committed it. What these men did was not an act of defiance, nor was it against the law. What LE did in response IS against the law. It took a Supreme Court ruling to change the law Rosa Parks broke. What will it take to change the law(s) the LE broke in Miami Beach?
          Comments re: LE should be aware of the laws they are sworn to uphold is correct. In most jurisdictions cadet officers are required to take and pass criminal law classes before being sworn in as LEO. Not sure if Miami Beach has such a requirement but I will research that also.
          Having said that, there is no way in this world that any officer can know ALL the laws they are sworn to uphold- lawyers can’t even do that. They should know the laws restricting their actions regarding basic constitutional civil rights violations however, and I am fairly confident that officers involved not only knew them, but decided to thumb their noses at those laws. “Civil Rights- them guys don’t get no Civil Rights”. They could easily have handled this the same ax any other peaceful demonstration, instead choosing to “show these guys who’s in charge here”. IMHO- a very bad decision as it just reinforces MSM rhetoric concerning LE/ citizen relations and foments more violence against LEO, something which serves no productive purpose these days. Treated with respect most individuals respond respectfully. Violating anyone’s civil rights is NEVER respectful. The Advocacy group showed the utmost respect fir the officers and the PD by informing them ahead of time of their peaceful intentions and by the way they conducted themselves during and after their detention. LEO were in the wrong and should face the consequences. “If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime”.

      5. @SB, Actually, it was a brilliant move. Exercising a Constitutional Civil Right, luring the city’s private army into display of deadly force and taking away their liberty. Getting pictures. Brilliant. If they would have had a camera man it might have been better.
        42 U.S.C. 1983 will be their short route to millionaireship. I imagine that tort lawyers from all over the country are tripping over themselves to get that case.

    19. I am a former LEO, but I am disturbed by the amount of reckless conduct among so many officers these days. I know there are many more good officers than bad and I understand todays climate. It is truly dangerous work beyond the normal dangers I faced many years ago. There has to be a return to respecting law officers and the media needs to stop being complicit in furthering the decline in relations between LEO and the public. I believe this will be settled out of court to avoid more publicity against the officers and the department to the detriment of the complainants.

      1. Because they didn’t get enough boo hoo attention the first time they posted and censored comments against them which stated real non one sided facts.

          1. Colonialgirl: You know not about whom you speak. Therefore you speak from ignorance. Ignorance is a bad place from which to speak; but, it is entertaining at times.

            1. Roy D whether MIO considers himself a conservative or a liberal does not matter. His comments are what ColonialGirl was basing her comment and she was very definitely on point. MIO’s sarcastic “ Boo Hoo” comment belongs on a whiny leftist forum

            2. Don’t sweat it Roy. I’ve figured out many aren’t real. They don’t care about the 2A they are just here to stir things up.
              It’s too bad they don’t devote the same energy to the politicians

        1. If that is the case then why the sarcastic “boo hoo”comment. Glad for your public service and your 2A stance. As former LEO, and 9 yrs USMC I understand the frustration today’s environment causes you. But I do know that in order to be s sworn LEO in CA I had to take and pass 2 yrs of criminal law courses and upgrade each year. BTW, my duty beat was in east LA where I served for 17 years. I am sorry that you took offense at my reply but reread your “boo hoo” comment and you will better understand my reply. As to blaming this site claiming censorship, I have not witnessed it personally but if you have I apologize for that. And to the comment re: me wanting to restrict anyone’s 1A Rights all I requested was that you take the one shiny reply to another forum. If you wish to take offense to that, so be it. I am as entitled to be offensive as you are to take offense. I fought along side many brothers- many of whom died-to defend that right. Have a great day.

    20. I would be interested in what information the park ranger called in and how. Meaning he could have caused the alarmed response if he called the PD saying something along the lines of “ I have a group of non compliant individuals with guns”. Im not saying they were non compliant, but us cops should know there are 3 sides to every story….the way one side saw it, the way the other side saw it and then what really happened. I could keep going but why should I explain when Im up against being a “typical useless scum goon cop”. You know the same thought process of throwing all into one class….that we as cops are not supposed to do. Oh and by the way I dont do at all because its just wrong. Yep most all of us want to do the right thing, all of us want to go home at the end of the shift. All of us have to make split second, often life changing (for all involved) decisions. Those decisions are often based on little or often skewed information….but I digress at this point. I respect what these fisherman were doing and I appluad them for exercising their rights. But like I said most times there is 3 sides to a story.

    21. I hope that this morphs into a class action suit. Police arriving with guns drawn, engaging in the threat of deadly force in response to a report that citizens were currently exercising a Constitutional Right.

    22. “Will Miami Beach compound the offense by using public funds to defend against a lawsuit in this case?”
      Yes, Miami Beach Police Chief Daniel Oates believes he and his bully/coward police staff (they only approached the 6 law abiding with guns drawn because they knew they were no threat) are exempt from obeying the law; and the Miami Beach Police will continue to violate the law. They will ignore all these laws too, and their defense of their clear violation of laws will be paid for by the taxpayers. No one will be terminated, any of their defense will be on government time, even at time and one half, and their lucrative pensions will be secure.

      1. The city of Miami has deeper pockets than the three wrong do’ers. If this can get off the ground as a class action, then it is conceivable that the entire city budget for several years would be needed to satisfy the judgement.

    23. If these guys were trying to prove a point about Florida law they should have brought an Attorney with them for their defense, after all the shootings to cops across the country the cops are being very defensive of anyone with a firearm and most of the cops don’t know the laws that are on the books.
      Time and place was wrong proving their point, by the way I carry everywhere I go but it’s concealed.

      1. @MB You don’t have a 42 USC 1983 claim unless you get arrested. They should have brought their own camera man. Then convened in the air conditioned comfort of their attorney’s office after the evidence was gathered and bail posted. Every city in America that has a private army rather than a police force is subject to the same weaknesses.

      2. @Missouri Born So you are saying that a person expressing their Constitutional Rights should bring an attorney with them to prove they have that right. You are a complete *******. And probably a liberal. The Constitution is the only reason we are not a police state right now. This is not a third world country, and you do not have a say in what is my right. These THUGS violated their oath, to protect the citizens of their jurisdictions. The Chief wanted to make a political statement that he does not like the 2nd Amendment, and he is willing to violate their rights to prove it. These officers can go to jail for using their authority to carry out an unlawful order from their Chief.

        1. @John, Missouri B is no such thing. He was just observing that police fear and loath attorneys. What he really meant was bring evidence gatherers for the future 42 USC 1983 suit.
          Yep, they were thugs, but there is no money in just sueing them. You have to institute legal proceedings against the deep pockets city. That will get the attention of Civil Rights abridging mayors.

            1. @John, No need to apologize, brother. Just a misunderstanding.
              @GR, You are the first guy that I would put on the legal team!

          1. @WB, Now THIS is where “I” should have been… I can feel the flow of what’s going to occur in this matter almost as if by experience? (wink)

      3. Missouri Born, the whole point of this “fishing expedition” was for education of both the police and the public. In places where OC is legal, the police shouldn’t hassle a person just because he/she is OC. In Virginia OC is legal, but I have rarely seen anyone OC in public, with the exceptions of at ranges and at gun shows. At the shows, all firearms must be unloaded, and at the entrance to the show, there are police officers that put nylon strips through the chambers of the handguns and secure the actions/bolts on long guns with the strips. The police don’t question anyone that carries, OC or CC, they just band the firearms and off you go.

    24. It’s quite obvious that this Park Ranger had a problem with open carry by a black guy specifically. Why? He approached him first and while he was sitting not really minding the other guy standing and walking towards him. That’s an American shame! No one else appears bothered except the ‘authorities’.

      1. Agreed
        Most of these ” Badged ” jumped ups are ass. Holes in uniforms , yes idiot cops are jumpy because people are fed up with them shooting inn innocent people

    Leave a Comment 81 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *