Zimmerman's city outlaws neighborhood watch firearms

[docsleepy]

Reuters ( and many other outlets ) is reporting that Sanford Florida is promulgating new rules that prohibit Neighborhood Watch members from carrying firearms.

Whether it is a good idea or not is for others to debate. My concern is that since the Neighborhood Watch members are not "peace officers" and are not "employees" of the city, this action appears to me (at least) to immediately run afoul of Florida Statutes 790.33, which states in part:

"790.33 Field of regulation of firearms and ammunition preempted.—
(1) PREEMPTION.—Except as expressly provided by the State Constitution or general law, the Legislature hereby declares that it is occupying the whole field of regulation of firearms and ammunition, including the purchase, sale, transfer, taxation, manufacture, ownership, possession, storage, and transportation thereof, to the exclusion of all existing and future county, city, town, or municipal ordinances or any administrative regulations or rules adopted by local or state government relating thereto. Any such existing ordinances, rules, or regulations are hereby declared null and void."

FS 790.33 also includes remedies for the citizens affected by such unlawful ordinances:

(3) PROHIBITIONS; PENALTIES.—
(a) Any person, county, agency, municipality, district, or other entity that violates the Legislature’s occupation of the whole field of regulation of firearms and ammunition, as declared in subsection (1), by enacting or causing to be enforced any local ordinance or administrative rule or regulation impinging upon such exclusive occupation of the field shall be liable as set forth herein.
(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.

 

[MErl]

Neighborhood Watch groups way well be vetted by the city they are in. Towns won't let just anyone put up the little signs you see so there has to be some interaction. One would want them to know and be known by the local police at minimum.
If the city approves the groups, they can set the rules for the groups they approve.

Enforcement of any such prohibition might be difficult. Where is the division between an evening walk and a patrol as a NW member?

 

[Ryanxia]

If it's like MErl says and they have to get some kind of approval from the city and the wording of the new proposed law says 'neighborhood watch' then just change the name and be more informal about it, still accomplishing the same goal of being active in protecting the streets. And thus 'Community observers' were born

If preemption applies then should be able to get it overturned if it goes through. And if they are informed in the first place about preemption sounds like the knowingly and willfully part applies and they can be fined up to $5,000 each.

 

[HexHead]

My first thought seeing this is it will run afoul of preemption.

It should be noted that Zimmerman wasn't "on patrol" at the time of his encounter. He was running personal errands. Would they expect NW members to just ignore what they see if they're armed? Or that they should never be armed?

Just another feel good, stupid law that will be overturned if enacted.

 

[Deltaboy1984]

It should not pass the Courts once they see it.

 

[kBob]

Good luck. Dealing with such in Florida can be about like following Alice down the rabbit hole.....

Not long after our CWL became law, Alachua County (Gainesville area) banned the carry of CWL guns in County buildings.

We attempted to fight the ban using the language of the preemption clause.

Then AG Blob, I mean Bob, Butterworth rendered an AG opinion that the COunty was acting as an individual property owner, who has the right to refuse CWL guns on their property and that it was an excellent use of the owners clause of the CWL legislation.

No amount of explaining that the tax payers of the county, including those with CWLs were the actual property owners would budge the state or county.

A few years later when Alachua County started a CERT program ( Community Emergency Response Team, based on the Japanese and Utah concepts of volunteer emergency response and disaster response) one of the stated rules that came out in the third or so class of folks was that the County forbade folks from carrying while on CERT duty. They also asked us to carry an abbreviated version of our alert bags and our Identifying vests and Emergency Management ID cards in our vehicles so as to be available when ever needed.

As it happens in that third class about one third of the class was carrying the night that policy was announced and none of them chose to meantion it. I know several ignored this prohibition during training and it was the main reason several simply walked away from the program after having taken the training.

While a bit off topic....the early classes of this CERT group (pre 9/11) were promised that CERT would absolutely not be "federalized" or "sucked into FEMA".......guess what? Of course it was. It is interesting to note that the Emergency Services Director under whom the County started CERT was later the National Director of (wait for it) FEMA.

Besides the CERT training I was able to also get the same First Responder Course Florida requires of LEOs and Firemen on the county's dime, but after CERT rolled into FEMA I stopped participating.

Oddly the guy that did the actual work of organizing the CERT could not understand why so many highly motivated citizens in the county dropped out of the program.

-kBob

 

[ChaoSS]

Oddly the guy that did the actual work of organizing the CERT could not understand why so many highly motivated citizens in the county dropped out of the program.

Didn't bother explaining it, did you?

 

[wildbilll]

I was going to write that since the neighborhood watch program is voluntary, not mandatory, therefore it would not be illegal for them to make a rule that states "no firearms" but it's hard to argue that in light of FS 790.33 (3) (f)

 

[lemaymiami]

Before I speak up.... I must admit to being from the Stone Age....

During my time in law enforcement, 1973 to 1995, the Neighborhood Watch that my department sponsored (small city in northern Dade county, near Miami) also specifically stated that no one (licensed or not) was allowed to carry when working as a Neighborhood Watch member. Now in this era, armed citizens were a great rarity so it was hardly an issue... I can say with authority that no city attorney would ever have agreed that it would be a good idea for any Neighborhood Watch to be armed in any fashion since the City would be directly liable for any consequences...

Fast forward to this year and regardless of the Zimmerman case or whether it did or did not involve his local Watch.... I'd be very surprised if any police department or municipality would sanction their Watch members being armed while acting as an affiliate of their city. The liability involved would just be too great. I know that most members of that support the right to carry, etc. will be up in arms (so to speak) about this but the liability to any government agency sponsoring any type of citizen's volunteer group with anyone carrying a firearm would be too great to agree to....

 

[Nickel Plated]

I am pretty interested in seeing how this law differentiates a "neighborhood watch" member from someone just going out for a walk at oh dark-thirty.
If it simply includes members of gov't approved or sponsored NW organizations I can see this law only making things worse. Since it may end up convincing some neighborhoods to simply set up unofficial neighborhood watches. Instead of a recognized organization to be exempt from these regulations. Instead of an organization that's atleast somewhat recognized by the gov't and local LE. You will simply have groups of concerned citizens deciding to "go for a walk in certain areas at certain times on a regular basis"

 

[docsleepy]

kbob -- did Alachua County's unlawful ordinance ever go before a judge? I thought there was a group that specialized in doing just that in Florida.

 

[kBob]

docsleepy,

In 1989-ish there was very little in Florida 2nd Amendment active other than USF with Marion Hammer (and I sat on the board of directors of that) and The North Central Florida Sportsmans Association whose board I also sat on.

We did what we thought correct at that time in getting a state representative to ask a clarification from the AG. This State Rep had recently won against the guy that started Florida's Assault weapons bill, David Flagg, and Mister Flagg publicly blamed "Those NRA people" for his defeat. We could find no attourney willing to take this to a judge, even among our local libertarians of the time.

Interestingly our club had only just stopped meeting in the County Commission chambers.

Our little club won eight NRA national Awards, including club of the year one year. One of those was for political action BTW.


ChaoSS,

As a matter of fact I made it quite plain that folks were quiting because of the FEMA take over AND because it was necessary to give up one of one's civil rights to serve their own neighbors in their own neighborhood. Also during real emergencies CERT trained people had been called in to man HQ functions rather than doing what they were trained and raised for, reacting in their own neighborhoods. For me the straw that broke the camel's back was we were doing a class discussion on handling evacuees from a Nuke disaster, specifically a weapon. I suggested that if we were plugged into the feds anyway we might attempt to find out what retired or former US military officers in the area had training in NBC/CBR, being in that category myself. We trained in doing with hands on equipment as NBC/CBR officers what was just being talked about by civilian emergency management. The instructor was very pleased and suggested such should certainly be done as a means of gathering a list of suspects in the Nuke terror plot........ in short he demonstrated that I was dealing with idiots on top of everything else.

I do still put my training to use and though I no longer carry a county ID card I still do my neighborhood patrol after bad storms and do still stop and offer assistance at accedients and one birth of twins. Guess the training was not for naught and the County still gets some use of it, but I do not go to meetinga and have not been vetted by FEMA.

-kBob

 

[HexHead]

Since when does a community that organizes a neighborhood watch put the city at risk for liability? You don't work for the city or the PD.

My little community has NW signs up. I was on the community board of directors for six years and in that time we basically had zero interaction with the police or city, beyond calling if you saw something amiss.

 

[MedWheeler]

I'm on neighborhood watch duty any time I'm in the neighborhood. I hope I'm not putting my city "at risk."

 

[crazyjennyblack]

It seems to me that the whole neighborhood watch thing is overrated. I spent part of my growing up years in a place that had one, and other than the cute little signs nobody was really "watching" anything. And it wasn't a low crime area either. Neighborhood Watch seems to do little else but phone the cops and advocate door locks, which any sensible people already know how to do. So why bother? And carrying weapons around and being a member of it seems to be a bad idea these days.

Maybe it would be easiest for people in neighborhoods to form an unofficial, unnamed group. Avoid attracting attention, hand-select people, don't post signs, etc... Or, if people want to get into the issue, perhaps a "neighborhood militia" might be in order. I doubt that city or county governments would allow it to happen, but it might be interesting for a group of people in an area to get together, and form a group that would actually patrol an area and act as a sort of law enforcement auxiliary. It would have to somehow fit the term "well organized" to avoid being seen as a trouble-making rabble. I know that a handful of states have volunteer elected constables who can get free or low price law enforcement training and certification, and can handle minor issues. Perhaps advocating the nationwide adoption of that system could be an option?

 

[ChaoSS]

kBob, I apologize if my post came off as an accusation. I phrased it badly. It was, in fact, meant as a question.

And it's a good thing you told him too. I don't understand how people can continue to be so blind and ignorant about things when they are laid out right in front of them.

 

[lemaymiami]

A properly setup and supported Neighborhood Watch is a lot more than just signs and meetings... It needs a dedicated full-time officer as liaison and scheduled patrols in specific neighborhoods with the ability to directly contact PD dispatch with anything they come across -along with enough training on what to look for... Some of the greatest benefits are the intangibles with a properly functioning Patrol -it's members will receive info on problems that might never rise to the level that would ordinarily be reported to a PD -but occasionally are very valuable.

As I write this I'm reminded that this whole program came about long before the tremendous increase in communications at all levels of society. This was before the rise of the internet and cellphones (most folks plugged in one way or the other during all their waking hours...). The whole idea may need to be re-thought... but I have to say that properly run Neighborhood Watch programs in conjunction with community policing can make a dramatic difference in crime levels in any community. I've actually seen it work.

 

[Pilot]

I'd be very surprised if any police department or municipality would sanction their Watch members being armed while acting as an affiliate of their city. The liability involved would just be too great. I know that most members of that support the right to carry, etc. will be up in arms (so to speak) about this but the liability to any government agency sponsoring any type of citizen's volunteer group with anyone carrying a firearm would be too great to agree to....

Then there needs to be a law shielding the watchmen, and city from liability, like police, and government officials get IF he is acting legally to defend himself. Acting on behalf of the city as a volunteer may be construed as agency, so specific laws need to address this issue.

 

[ChaoSS]

Working with the police department, having a liason, does not mean that you are working for the department, or on their behalf, or that they accept any liability for your actions. It can still be an entirely voluntary, community based program with no control, oversight, funding, or anything other than acceptance from the police department.

 

[lemaymiami]

Run that one by your attorney.... and when he quits laughing (my kind of attorney...) ask him to explain just why you'd end up on the short end of the stick in any civil court.

As far as any law protecting city or other entity from liability, to put it mildly you'd be swimming upstream on that proposition. In fact in my state, Florida, cities and their police departments have been losing some of the liability protections they enjoyed for many years (and that process was well under way when I was still a cop back in the late eighties..). Case in point was a Florida supreme court ruling that removed the protections of sovereign immunity from police agencies for death or injuries suffered during any police vehicle pursuit.... That was the real driving factor behind every department changing their pursuit policies...

In short the trend that I've seen is toward less protection from civil actions for police agencies and the entities they work for..... at least here in Florida.

This sort of stuff is one of many, many reasons I was very glad to leave police work and get into another line of work after 22 years on the streets. Most folks would never believe the number of decisions that are taken by an otherwise standup police outfit that are directly related to what can happen to you and your city in civil court. It would take a few adult beverages and an entire evening to go over them all. Wish it weren't so.

 

[wildbilll]

I think the headline for this thread is misleading ("outlaws"). They can't make it against the law to carry a firearm while on a Neighborhood Watch patrol.
The police can't run the NW, they can only agree to cooperate with it, provide support for it.
They can make rules that prevent them from cooperating/providing support unless the NW internal rules ban firearms, but they can't stop people from forming organizations.

 

[crazyjennyblack]

I don't think the "sovereign immunity" issue is the answer. Governments need to be held accountable. The issue is that the laws governing self defense are too restrictive, and the culture of many areas of our country is set against it. For example, laws from days of old: "If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed" (Exodus 22:2) Only in these modern days can you not defend your personal property, and defending the lives of others is a risky move.

We also have too many prosecutors looking to make a name for themselves. Perhaps there should be penalties for prosecutors who needlessly persecute citizens? Or at maybe government refunds for the legal bills of people who get prosecuted and win their case? The whole "you can beat the rap but you can't beat the ride" thing needs to be changed, because the lives of those determined to be innocent still get ruined.

I totally agree that citizens ought to be able to contact Police Dispatch more directly if they are involved in the Neighborhood Watch. The trouble with that is the response time. In many areas, it takes the police 15 minutes to show up. If the only tool that the watch people have is a radio and they are only allowed to observe and report, the crime is likely to be over before the police arrive. At the very least, the watch should carry cameras capable of taking accurate photos at night. But then that opens another can of worms....

 

[Frank Ettin]

...The issue is that the laws governing self defense are too restrictive, and the culture of many areas of our country is set against it. For example, laws from days of old: "If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed" (Exodus 22:2) Only in these modern days can you not defend your personal property, and defending the lives of others is a risky move...

If by "modern" you mean the last 300 or so years, okay. But in fact our current rules on the use of force in self defense, and the rule against using lethal force to defend property, have their roots well in the history of our Common Law.

...I totally agree that citizens ought to be able to contact Police Dispatch more directly if they are involved in the Neighborhood Watch...

Where can't they, even if not a member of a Neighborhood Watch. In our community anyone can call Police Dispatch directly -- all he needs is the telephone number (which is readily available).

 

[WardenWolf]

It won't hold up in court. One's 2nd Amendment rights do not end simply because they are acting as a member of a neighborhood watch. There's no legal precedence to support that.

 

[Frank Ettin]

It won't hold up in court. One's 2nd Amendment rights do not end simply because they are acting as a member of a neighborhood watch. There's no legal precedence to support that.

Well, first the word is "precedent."

Second, AFAIK there's also no court decision saying that an organized Neighborhood Watch program can't regulate the conduct of a volunteer while "on duty", including prohibiting him from carrying a weapon.