Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Saw this while looking up code yesterday...

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Suffolk Virginia
    Posts
    699

    Saw this while looking up code yesterday...

    It won't let me cut n paste, but it's sec 54-122.

    http://library.municode.com/mobile/d...12%26docID%3d4

    Would I be reading it correctly, that if I had a incident with a bg, and it came down accordingly, the city could charge me with discharge of a firearm in public?

    I've been attempting to find what local ordinance are enforceable, if any that may/may not be covered under pre-excemption of state law. Google hasn't been to kind on the subject though..

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  2. #2
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037
    What city?

    And no, use of a firearm in justifiable self-defense overrides "discharge of a weapon public".
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Suffolk Virginia
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by wylde007 View Post
    What city?

    And no, use of a firearm in justifiable self-defense overrides "discharge of a weapon public".
    Suffolk, Va. Thanks for the quick answer. I thought as much, but just attempting to do the correct research


    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  4. #4
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Exclamation

    It also appears that this (and other) section of the code may well be preempted anyhow.

    54.121 is absolutely in violation.
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  5. #5
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by wylde007 View Post
    What city?

    And no, use of a firearm in justifiable self-defense overrides "discharge of a weapon public".
    Generally speaking, I am pretty sure there is no "overriding" when it comes to these sorts of things. Every statute or ordinance I have ever seen has included concrete exceptions to allow for self-defense or other considerations as needed.

    This ordinance is no exception. If you read further down, you find this:

    (c)

    Exceptions. The provisions of this section shall not be applicable to:

    (1)

    Law enforcement officers engaged in the lawful performance of their duties as such, nor shall they be applicable in any situation in which the discharge of a weapon is necessary for the preservation or protection of human life or property.
    By the way, why is the Suffolk Board of Supervisors so lazy? They have an entire section of code that has been preempted for years, and rather than repeal it, they just have the editor add a note saying in effect, "this is preempted, so just ignore it."

    Also noted that they have not yet cleaned up their fingerprint requirement for CHP applicants.

    TFred

  6. #6
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by wylde007 View Post
    It also appears that this (and other) section of the code may well be preempted anyhow.

    54.121 is absolutely in violation.
    See my note in prior post...

    but... discharge cannot be preempted. 15.2-915 does not cover discharge.

    TFred

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Suffolk Virginia
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    See my note in prior post...

    but... discharge cannot be preempted. 15.2-915 does not cover discharge.

    TFred
    So should I contact the city on any of this for clarification? It just seems to be counter productive on the matter.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  8. #8
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by mpguy View Post
    So should I contact the city on any of this for clarification? It just seems to be counter productive on the matter.
    No, no need. Did you miss the other part of my post? There is an exception to the no discharge ordinance:

    "Exceptions. The provisions of this section shall not be applicable to: Law enforcement officers engaged in the lawful performance of their duties as such, nor shall they be applicable in any situation in which the discharge of a weapon is necessary for the preservation or protection of human life or property."

    TFred (One M&P guy to another!)
    Last edited by TFred; 07-05-2012 at 05:07 PM.

  9. #9
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by mpguy View Post
    So should I contact the city on any of this for clarification? It just seems to be counter productive on the matter.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
    If you want clarification, ask User. You sure aren't going to get it from the locals.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Suffolk Virginia
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    No, no need. Did you miss the other part of my post? There is an exception to the no discharge ordinance:

    "Exceptions. The provisions of this section shall not be applicable to: Law enforcement officers engaged in the lawful performance of their duties as such, nor shall they be applicable in any situation in which the discharge of a weapon is necessary for the preservation or protection of human life or property."

    TFred (One M&P guy to another!)
    I missed read the last part of that post. I apologize for that. For some reason I had a blonde moment. Lol. Thanks guys for the info.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  11. #11
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by mpguy View Post
    I missed read the last part of that post. I apologize for that. For some reason I had a blonde moment. Lol. Thanks guys for the info.
    No worries!

    TFred

  12. #12
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Pleading "Necessity of the Moment" is always valid in court. Most traffic ordinances make it illegal to cross over a double-yellow line.
    But I think if you were charged with it and said, "Your Honor, if I had not crossed over the line I would have run over the mother and her two children in a stroller that attempted to cross the street without looking."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •