Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
The Attic
Florida gun store owner's "Muslim Free Zone" upheld by Federal Court
Nov 29, 2015 21:23:33   #
Jackel Loc: California
 
Federal Court Grants AFLC’s Motion to Dismiss CAIR Lawsuit against Florida Gun Store’s “Muslim Free Zone” ByPamela Geller on November
27, 2015 CAIR 42 Comments cair ad

Our intrepid legal team, the American Freedom Law Center, which has successfully represented us in numerous free speech lawsuits, has won
an important victory for freedom against Hamas-CAIR:

AFLC_CAIR_banner2 (see attachment)

“Federal Court Grants AFLC’s Motion to Dismiss CAIR Lawsuit against Florida Gun Store’s ‘Muslim Free Zone,’” American Freedom Law
Center, November 24, 2015:

Today (November 24, 2015), a Florida federal judge granted a motion to dismiss filed by the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC),
dismissing a lawsuit filed by CAIR Florida against AFLC’s client, Florida Gun Supply.

In the lawsuit, CAIR alleged that Florida Gun Supply’s refusal to equip Islamic terrorists is religious discrimination in violation of Title II of the
Civil Rights Act.

On July 29th, CAIR Florida filed the lawsuit against Florida Gun Supply because its owner declared in a YouTube video that his retail gun
store is a “Muslim Free Zone” following the Chattanooga, Tennessee terrorist attack in which five service members were gunned down.

The owner of the gun store, Andy Hallinan, refuses to equip the next Paris-type terrorist with dangerous firearms. Consequently, pursuant to
its official, written policy, Florida Gun Supply will not serve “[a]nyone who is either directly or indirectly associated with terrorism in any way . . .”

Despite Hallinan’s legitimate concerns about public safety—concerns which have been confirmed most recently with the deadly terrorist
attacks in France and the claims by ISIS to engage in similar attacks here in the United States—CAIR Florida sued Florida Gun Supply in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, alleging religious discrimination.

AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel Robert Muise commented:

“As our motion and now the court’s ruling make clear, CAIR’s lawsuit was patently frivolous if not outright dangerous. No firearms dealer or
gun range owner for that matter should be required to sell weapons to or train anyone that the dealer or owner has reason to believe is a
terrorist threat. We all have a civic responsibility to prevent the next terrorist attack. CAIR’s lawsuit was an effort to prevent business
owners from doing so.”

In its ruling granting AFLC’s request to dismiss CAIR’s lawsuit, the court stated that it

“must agree that [CAIR] has insufficiently alleged imminent harm. The Complaint contains only bald, conclusory allegations devoid of
factual enhancement.”

The court stated further that

“the general desire of [CAIR] in this case to have Muslims able to access [Florida Gun Supply’s] shooting range someday in the future is
insufficient . . . There are simply no facts grounding the assertion that [CAIR] and/or one of its constituents will be harmed—[CAIR] has
failed to allege when and in what manner the alleged injuries are going to occur.”

Consequently, because CAIR could not show any harm or injury, the court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction.

AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel David Yerushalmi commented:

“This dismissal was yet another AFLC victory against CAIR and its jihadi lawfare against patriotic Americans across the country. This victory
follows on the heels of a recent victory against CAIR in a Michigan federal court where CAIR’s subpoenas were quashed and CAIR’s
nefarious client sanctioned for abusive practices. CAIR was born from a jihadi terrorist conspiracy, and it has done little to distance itself
from those bona fides. CAIR is on notice: if you attempt to use the courts to conduct your civilizational jihad, AFLC will be there to defend
law-abiding, patriotic Americans and our nation’s national security. We will match and defeat your civilization jihad with our constitutional
lawfare in every courtroom across the nation.”

- See more at:
http://pamelageller.com/2015/11/federal-court-grants-aflcs-motion-to-dismiss-cair-lawsuit-against-florida-gun-stores-muslim-free-
zone.html/#sthash.91BfKSVJ.dpuf



Reply
Nov 29, 2015 21:27:34   #
Collie lover Loc: St. Louis, MO
 
Glad the store's right to refuse to sell guns to possible terrorists was upheld by the court. :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Nov 30, 2015 08:06:20   #
Frank T Loc: New York, NY
 
Collie lover wrote:
Glad the store's right to refuse to sell guns to possible terrorists was upheld by the court. :thumbup: :thumbup:


If the GOP would grow a pair, there's been a bill in Washington to ban the selling of guns to anyone on the Do Not Fly list. Of course the NRA is against it and lobbying their cohorts in the Republican Party.
If you want to prevent guns being sold to terrorists, this bill is a good place to start.
The actions of one headline grabbing sphincter accomplishes nothing.

Reply
 
 
Nov 30, 2015 08:57:29   #
SBW
 
Frank T wrote:
If the GOP would grow a pair, there's been a bill in Washington to ban the selling of guns to anyone on the Do Not Fly list. Of course the NRA is against it and lobbying their cohorts in the Republican Party.
If you want to prevent guns being sold to terrorists, this bill is a good place to start.
The actions of one headline grabbing sphincter accomplishes nothing.


Bad bill. There are quite a few people on the no fly list that should not be on that list. I believe your icon Teddy (the good swimmer) Kennedy was on that list. Actually, come to think of it, maybe he should have been on the list. But in reality there are people that are and have been on that list that had no business being on it.

What you are advocating is a form of profiling. I thought you bleeding hearts hated that?

Reply
Nov 30, 2015 09:57:10   #
OldDoc Loc: New York
 
Collie lover wrote:
Glad the store's right to refuse to sell guns to possible terrorists was upheld by the court. :thumbup: :thumbup:


Please reread the article. The court did not uphold the refusal to sell guns to possible terrorists, the court upheld the right of the gun store owner to say in public that he would refuse to sell guns to possible terrorists. The dismissal was based on the failure of the plaintiff to demonstrate any actual harm, since they had not attempted to purchase guns at the store. While the court's decision is a victory for free speech, it should not be seen as an endorsement of bigotry against Muslims (or , for that matter, black Americans, in whose case the courts have already ruled that a store doing business with the public cannot prohibit sales based on color).

Reply
Nov 30, 2015 10:04:54   #
Opus Loc: South East Michigan
 
OldDoc wrote:
Please reread the article. The court did not uphold the refusal to sell guns to possible terrorists, the court upheld the right of the gun store owner to say in public that he would refuse to sell guns to possible terrorists. The dismissal was based on the failure of the plaintiff to demonstrate any actual harm, since they had not attempted to purchase guns at the store. While the court's decision is a victory for free speech, it should not be seen as an endorsement of bigotry against Muslims (or , for that matter, black Americans, in whose case the courts have already ruled that a store doing business with the public cannot prohibit sales based on color).
Please reread the article. The court did not uphol... (show quote)


Please don't muddy the water here on UHH by reading and presenting facts, we are not used to it.

:idea: :idea:

Reply
Nov 30, 2015 10:18:14   #
Frank T Loc: New York, NY
 
SBW wrote:
Bad bill. There are quite a few people on the no fly list that should not be on that list. I believe your icon Teddy (the good swimmer) Kennedy was on that list. Actually, come to think of it, maybe he should have been on the list. But in reality there are people that are and have been on that list that had no business being on it.

What you are advocating is a form of profiling. I thought you bleeding hearts hated that?


I'm afraid, you're wrong again. Profiling people based upon race is unacceptable. Profiling people based upon their actions is not as long as it is applied evenly across the board.

Reply
 
 
Nov 30, 2015 10:27:39   #
GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA
 
Opus wrote:
Please don't muddy the water here on UHH by reading and presenting facts, we are not used to it.

:idea: :idea:


Wowzer, you have hit on the absolute truth about UHH!

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Nov 30, 2015 10:43:45   #
SBW
 
Frank T wrote:
I'm afraid, you're wrong again. Profiling people based upon race is unacceptable. Profiling people based upon their actions is not as long as it is applied evenly across the board.


Not afraid, not me, but you are wrong yet again. You did not address the issue. That is a bill to prohibit gun purchases based on a faulty no fly list. Or does that even matter to you? Oh, I forgot, with you libs it is feelings and intentions that matter, nothing else.

Reply
Nov 30, 2015 10:46:52   #
Frank T Loc: New York, NY
 
SBW wrote:
Not afraid, not me, but you are wrong yet again. You did not address the issue. That is a bill to prohibit gun purchases based on a faulty no fly list. Or does that even matter to you? Oh, I forgot, with you libs it is feelings and intentions that matter, nothing else.


If the list is faulty then it needs to be corrected. Pretty simple.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
The Attic
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.