I certainly took no offense and never considered your remarks to be sarcastic. A second reading the first paragraph my last post reveals to me what could easily be misinterpreted as curt, or even caustic, and was definitely not my intent. That’s the limitation of the written word, especially in the hands of someone clumsy with syntax such as myself: the intended tone is often lost in translation. And just for future reference, when I use sarcasm, it is meant in a good natured spirit, mocking absurdity in general, not anyone in particular. Nevertheless, this is a good reminder for me to be careful in my choice of words and use of humor. That’s something that’s really difficult to convey in a setting like this.

I mean it when I say that this is a fascinating blog for someone like me: not a lawyer, but someone who works with and for lawyers on a regular basis. In my role as an investigator and forensic consultant, I get the chance to see the practical aspects of the legal system played out. It’s absolutely fascinating to watch the lawyers deal with the arcane language of the law and approach the same set of facts from two diametrically opposed viewpoints. Basically, it’s a front row seat to the ultimate reality show.

Again, keep up the great work,

Jeff

The link you to provide to Jon Gutmacher’s website is really helpful. Thank you very much for it. It seems that he has done an excellent analysis of the law’s flaws and benefits and it’s future problems.

I hope you continue to read this blog

I may have been remiss in providing a list of NON-forcible felonies in FL, but I was trying to illustrate that not all felonies are forcible. So, straight from the horse’s mouth is Florida’s statute on what IS considered forcible:

F.S. 776.08  Forcible felony.–”Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual

At first blush, Florida’s legislative philosophy seems to be the polar opposite of some of the states that were among the original 13 colonies and still have a lasting legacy of reliance on common law. In contrast to SC (where I currently live) which seems to leave nearly everything undefined and open to interpretation, FL laws are extensive, expansive, and seem to reveal an almost obsessive need to define EVERYTHING and anticipate all possible contingencies. Of course, trying to foresee every possible contingency is a fool’s errand, and if you look closely in the statutes, you will find a common thread: our old friend the “reasonable man”, at least implicitly. Ultimately, the question of what is reasonable is still a question to be decided by a trier of fact, whether a jury if demanded by the defendant or a judge in a bench trial. I share your concern with the procedural questions and with regard to who decides to prosecute. My first guess would be that it is still left to the discretion of the State’s Attorney, but it’s just that: a guess. Your question about who grants immunity is much easier to answer, at least in theory: the Florida Legislature and Governor, by passing and signing the bill, respectively. Deciding WHEN immunity applies IS open for interpretation.

I too am troubled by police being the arbiters of reasonableness and if or when a statute applies, but in practice, they do it every day. Example: I once conducted an inspection for a client involved in a divorce and located a wiretap connected to her telephone line in a detached garage. I then installed a hidden video camera (without audio) and caught the client’s brother-in-law red handed in the act of removing the wiretap interface and recording device. We had a “staged” conversation on the tapped line to convince whoever was listening that the inspection had not yet taken place, but was imminent, in order to entice him to remove the evidence, and he took the bait. Here’s the punch line to this off-topic anecdote: the client promptly called the police, who promptly dispatched a uniformed officer, who in turn promptly announced that “this is a civil matter” and refused to even take a written report, much less refer the matter to the D.A. (this was in GA) for prosecution. Say, that reminds me, there’s another non-forcible felony: wiretapping! Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

Back on topic: Jon Gutmacher is a Florida attorney, formerly a prosecutor and now in private practice with 25 years experience, and an authoritative source who literally wrote a book on the subject of firearm and self defense laws in FL. I highly recommend this, his analysis on the new law (including some of the provisions you’re grappling with) and some of its potential flaws and unintended consequences: http://www.floridafirearmslaw.com/faq001.shtml
Mr. Gutmacher covers all the bases in far more depth and clarity than I could ever hope to.

In closing, let me thank you for the opportunity to participate in your forum. The hallmark of your blog as I’ve experienced so far has been thoughtful, polite, well reasoned discussion from all points of view. It’s refreshing to find an atmosphere free from vitriole and hyperbole that seem to dominate so many other blogs. I feel like I learn something every time I visit and read some of your discussion groups. Keep up the great work,

Jeff