Here is the link to the story..
https://youtu.be/xou1Spau5DE?si=x0xqtWYTUn52iXaA

Here is the story!!
https://youtu.be/xou1Spau5DE?si=x0xqtWYTUn52iXaA

Did they or did they exercise their right to choose the activities allowed on District properties?

Well you’re wrong there. Panhandling is NOT Illegal, You can’t harass people when your standing there… That’s Illegal..

Yeah, I saw that the other three times it was posted. Thanks for making my point though; he was asked to leave District property due to his actions.

SCOTUS doesn't need to restate the power of a constitutional right. A constitutional right is absolute. If you surrender it, you can reclaim it at any time. The most common thing maost people might recognize is related to Miranda. You can remain silent, or waive that right and talk, but you may reclaim the right at any time.

CDDs and ARC exist under Florida State authority. As a government extension, they cannot legally enforce an unconstitutional restriction. Even if a resident does not formally reclaim that right.

If CDDs and ARC are not a state entity, why do they display Florida state license plates? Only state agencies can do that. They are bound by that case. Like it or not.

[QUOTE=Bill14564;2459179]Did they or did they exercise their right to choose the activities allowed on District properties?[/QUOTE

That corner is not district property.. And the Cop should of investigated that.. Not just listen to the dispatcher. He can be held accountable, and lose his qualified immunity.

Maybe, maybe not. That would likely be a detail in a legal agreement somewhere. Unquestionably, the land those sidewalks were built on was private at one time. The maintenance of the roads was turned over to the County which required them to be accessible to the public. But was the land turned over as well and if so, did that include the land under the sidewalk? If the man decides to try and sue the District then maybe we'll find out.

Go to you tube search TRESPASSED FOREVER FROM THREE COUNTIESAND 57 SQUARE MILES and u can watch video only about 8 minutes long…:bigbow:

Of course, if I want to find something about the Villages I should search on "three counties" or "57 square miles." But that's okay... you apparently haven't notice yet that the link has been provided in at least four posts so far.

You can keep saying the same thing over and over, it will still be wrong.

When you bought in The Villages, you bought a home with Deed Restrictions. The District was not a party to that transaction.

There is nothing inherently illegal about Deed Restrictions, provided they don't discriminate agains a protected class. Private transactions are not protected by the 1st Amendment, nor are "signs" protected by the 1st Amendment. If signs were protected by the 1st Amendment, cities and towns wouldn't be able to adopt sign regulations. The 1st Amendment is the Right of Free Speech ... it is not "The Right to Post and/or Carry Signs".

1st Amendment right, he/she is 100% legal except in Courtyard Villages where the roads are private & the Villas are private pproperty.
Everywhere else the Sidewalks & Roads are all Public...:bigbow:

Everyone was reasonably polite, but the guy with badge, needs a lot more training and understanding of his job. Where did he come up with the "semi-public" thing?

You would think a local LEO would know the roads and sidewalks of The Villages are public property?

I assume some people recognized where he was standing? Was it on a public street? I'd venture a guess, that the guy with the sign knows the difference, knows he was in the right and there's a lawsuit coming ... as there should be. If the LEO wasn't sure, he should have checked with a superior, instead of spouting off nonsense.

JMOYMMV

Loitering is not having a purpose,he has a purpose…