• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Chesterfield Parks Wording

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
From the VCDL Alert:

Chesterfield County is on track to correct a badly written ordinance that caused a gun-owner who was legally in a Chesterfield park to be expelled from that park a couple of months ago. The current ordinance ( 14-11(b) ), which reads in part, "No PERSON shall transport, possess or carry a loaded firearm within 100 yards of any property line of any county public school or county park, except as otherwise permitted by state law" is confusing and has a chilling effect on a person wishing to exercise their right to keep and bear arms. Remember, laws are not written so that you can search to see if something is legal. Instead you need to search for something that says it is illegal and if nothing is found, then it is legal. Heaven help you if you miss a code section where it is made illegal. The police did not do the extra research required to find out if carrying in a park was legal. They simply took the ordinance on its face value and kicked the gun owner out of the park. (This kind of unnecessarily confusing wording is exactly why the Richmond Library's policy on guns is going to get them into trouble one of these days and why VCDL did a protest at the main library.) The proposed new wording reads, "No HUNTER shall transport, possess or carry a loaded firearm within 100 yards of any property line of any county public school or county park, except as otherwise permitted by state law." That should prevent confusion with those who are not hunting.

Well now that's much better:uhoh:

Now, only people with hunting licenses are prohibited:rolleyes:

"While hunting would be a better description". We are dealing with a County nicknamed "Arrestifield".

Pardon me Sir, I see you're wearing a firearm.

Well, yeah, I am.

Do you hunt or do you have a hunting license.

Well, yeah I do.

I'm afraid I'll have to Cite you for a violation of County law.

No hunters may carry here.
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
You aint a hunter unless you gots yer hunting license pinned on properly and are wearing the required square inches of BLAZE ORANGE.

If'n you is carrying a smokepole or dragging dead meat wit' out them thangs you is a poacher.

They can't arrest you under that law if'n you air a poacher. (Wonder if'n they can arrest you fer poachin', or do they gots to git a <hack, spit> Game Warden?)

And y'all thought I wasted all them years reading the law.

stay safe.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
You aint a hunter unless you gots yer hunting license pinned on properly and are wearing the required square inches of BLAZE ORANGE.

If'n you is carrying a smokepole or dragging dead meat wit' out them thangs you is a poacher.

They can't arrest you under that law if'n you air a poacher. (Wonder if'n they can arrest you fer poachin', or do they gots to git a <hack, spit> Game Warden?)

And y'all thought I wasted all them years reading the law.

stay safe.

Oh...that makes more sense, Thanks Skid!:lol:
This is much better. Now those DogHunters that wear those stupid two tone, blaze orange targets on their heads, have to stay off of county property.:eek:
 

Marco

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
3,905
Location
Greene County
Chesterfield County is on track to correct a badly written ordinance that caused a gun-owner who was legally in a Chesterfield park to be expelled from that park a couple of months ago. The current ordinance ( 14-11(b) ), which reads in part, "No PERSON shall transport, possess or carry a loaded firearm within 100 yards of any property line of any county public school or county park, except as otherwise permitted by state law" is confusing and has a chilling effect on a person wishing to exercise their right to keep and bear arms. Remember, laws are not written so that you can search to see if something is legal. Instead you need to search for something that says it is illegal and if nothing is found, then it is legal. Heaven help you if you miss a code section where it is made illegal. The police did not do the extra research required to find out if carrying in a park was legal. They simply took the ordinance on its face value and kicked the gun owner out of the park. (This kind of unnecessarily confusing wording is exactly why the Richmond Library's policy on guns is going to get them into trouble one of these days and why VCDL did a protest at the main library.) The proposed new wording reads, "No HUNTER shall transport, possess or carry a loaded firearm within 100 yards of any property line of any county public school or county park, except as otherwise permitted by state law." That should prevent confusion with those who are not hunting

Why is Chesterfield co. targeting the Hunter's? What did Tab and his kin do that was so bad the can't go to the parks? I didn't know they are/were such a quarrelsome family.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
I like VCDL President.

But he takes everything seriously. I expect he would have opened his bomb shelter for people after hearing the "War of the Worlds" Radio broadcast.

I have a vision of him at home wringing his hands over this thread and saying "Where did I go wrong", so to preserve his sanity......

PHILIP, WE'RE JUST KIDDING!:lol:
 

riverrat10k

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
1,472
Location
on a rock in the james river
Used to be a law about "hunting within x feet a road". Now all I can find in a quick look is a statement that it is illegal to shoot across a road.

If my property abuts a park or school, isn't the County "condemning" and "taking" my land? Am I not due compensation under eminent domain laws for the "taking" and "loss of use/acess"?
 

VCDL President

Centurion
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
600
Location
Midlothian, Virginia, USA
From the VCDL Alert:



Well now that's much better:uhoh:

Now, only people with hunting licenses are prohibited:rolleyes:

"While hunting would be a better description". We are dealing with a County nicknamed "Arrestifield".

I'm going to suggest the Board of Supervisors change the wording to "No person while hunting shall transport..."
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
I'm going to suggest the Board of Supervisors change the wording to "No person while hunting shall transport..."

While it is entertaining making fun of the wording Philip, I think there is a more serious issue you should look at. The proposed changes do infringe on the rights of property owners and lessees that intersect county property.

I expect there will be some unhappy hunters at the meeting.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Why is Chesterfield co. targeting the Hunter's? What did Tab and his kin do that was so bad the can't go to the parks? I didn't know they are/were such a quarrelsome family.
Well, it's not that they're targeting the hunters because they don't like hunters... they are targeting the hunters because according to 15.2-915, hunters are the only ones they are allowed to target!

It really is just that simple.

TFred
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Well, it's not that they're targeting the hunters because they don't like hunters... they are targeting the hunters because according to 15.2-915, hunters are the only ones they are allowed to target!

It really is just that simple.

TFred

STOP POINTING OUT THE OBVIOUS - it's annoying to folks with conspiract theories.

stay safe.
 

VCDL President

Centurion
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
600
Location
Midlothian, Virginia, USA
While it is entertaining making fun of the wording Philip, I think there is a more serious issue you should look at. The proposed changes do infringe on the rights of property owners and lessees that intersect county property.

I expect there will be some unhappy hunters at the meeting.

The hunters are certainly invited to the BoS meeting to suggest dropping the entire ordinance off the books. VCDL would be supportive of such a move. I prefer to let hunting organizations take care of hunting matters.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
The hunters are certainly invited to the BoS meeting to suggest dropping the entire ordinance off the books. VCDL would be supportive of such a move. I prefer to let hunting organizations take care of hunting matters.

You're probably right even though it's not a hunting matter, rather a land use issue.
I don't hunt in Chesterfield so it doesn't concern me, then again....I don't use Chesterfield parks either. Might as well attend to my own business.

I just brought it up because another VCDL member who is effected by it, talked to me about the problem this evening.
 
Last edited:

Marco

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
3,905
Location
Greene County
Well, it's not that they're targeting the hunters because they don't like hunters... they are targeting the hunters because according to 15.2-915, hunters are the only ones they are allowed to target!

It really is just that simple.

TFred


You clearly have totally misunderstood my post. Nothing in my post is serious as I was referring to the folks with the last name Hunter... ie......Tab Hunter an actor from long ago.
You and Paul are old enough to remember him.

If you had bothered to read my post completely before commenting (and read peter's post that followed) you might have understood.

It just that simple.



BOT:
Yep, the way it is wriiten the Guberment is once again stepping on the rights of folks...
 
Last edited:

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
VCDL President

user-offline.png
The hunters are certainly invited to the BoS meeting to suggest dropping the entire ordinance off the books. VCDL would be supportive of such a move. I prefer to let hunting organizations take care of hunting matters.

It's interesting that the largest segment of licensed gun owners (many people own guns but do not have a CHP or hunt) in Virginia, have just been told to fight our own fights.

772,864 hunting licenses sold in our state in 2007

314,456 concealed-handgun permits issued in our state, 2007

But Skeet and Target shooters are deserving of assistance.


VCDL Alert
1. Big turnout needed to support County approval of a sporting clays range in Goochland! Antis will be there
******************************************************************

What began as a tongue in cheek thread, has become enlightening.

sho2.gif
 
Last edited:

Marco

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
3,905
Location
Greene County
It's interesting that the largest segment of licensed gun owners (many people own guns but do not have a CHP or hunt) in Virginia, have just been told to fight our own fights.

772,864 hunting licenses sold in our state in 2007

314,456 concealed-handgun permits issued in our state, 2007

But Skeet and Target shooters are deserving of assistance.


******************************************************************

What began as a tongue in cheek thread, has become enlightening.

sho2.gif


But wasn't trap/skeet shooting just a way for hunters to improve there skills during the off season, and than became a sport.
Give men cars and or guns and there's bound to be a competition sooner or later.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
But wasn't trap/skeet shooting just a way for hunters to improve there skills during the off season, and than became a sport.
Give men cars and or guns and there's bound to be a competition sooner or later.

That was my point Marco. There seem to be some inconsistencies in policy.
 

VCDL President

Centurion
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
600
Location
Midlothian, Virginia, USA
It's interesting that the largest segment of licensed gun owners (many people own guns but do not have a CHP or hunt) in Virginia, have just been told to fight our own fights.

772,864 hunting licenses sold in our state in 2007

314,456 concealed-handgun permits issued in our state, 2007

But Skeet and Target shooters are deserving of assistance.


******************************************************************

What began as a tongue in cheek thread, has become enlightening.

VCDL has never had hunting as part of its mission. We stepped into it a little bit if it dealt with hunting with firearms. We pushed and got a change to the law to allow CHP holders to carry for self-defense while hunting years ago.

VCDL spent time and energy on the Sunday hunting issue two years ago figuring that hunters would want the freedom of choice as to whether they could hunt in Sundays or not. Boy, oh boy, did we find out that that isn't true! We caught flack from some hunting organizations, one quite big, who liked the Sunday ban and we were told to mind our own business. You could have pushed me over with a feather, but I learned a lesson from it.

Since I don't hunt (haven't since I was around 18) and, to my knowledge, neither does anyone else on the Board, we really don't keep our finger on the pulse of hunters like we do the other aspect of gun ownership. Had I been a hunter I would probably have been aware of the conflict over Sunday hunting. It is just too easy to misread hunting issues when you are not immersed in it. For example, I could see fighting to get the Chesterfield provision removed only to find out that hunting organizations like the ordinance the way it is. You might say, "nah," but that's what I thought about Sunday hunting. If it is a big issue for hunters, why haven't they tried to get this ordinance removed before? Why haven't they tried to get the underlying enabling statute removed at the General Assembly?

We are hardly throwing anyone to the wolves or leaving them to fend for themselves. There are a lot of hunting organizations out there and they can fight out these issues amongst themselves and earn their keep ;-) Meanwhile VCDL will watch all the other aspects of gun ownership.

All that said, should the hunting organizations try to fix a firearms-related hunting law while speaking in one voice, VCDL would most likely add its voice to such a chorus.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
VCDL has never had hunting as part of its mission. We stepped into it a little bit if it dealt with hunting with firearms. We pushed and got a change to the law to allow CHP holders to carry for self-defense while hunting years ago.

VCDL spent time and energy on the Sunday hunting issue two years ago figuring that hunters would want the freedom of choice as to whether they could hunt in Sundays or not. Boy, oh boy, did we find out that that isn't true! We caught flack from some hunting organizations, one quite big, who liked the Sunday ban and we were told to mind our own business. You could have pushed me over with a feather, but I learned a lesson from it.

Since I don't hunt (haven't since I was around 18) and, to my knowledge, neither does anyone else on the Board, we really don't keep our finger on the pulse of hunters like we do the other aspect of gun ownership. Had I been a hunter I would probably have been aware of the conflict over Sunday hunting. It is just too easy to misread hunting issues when you are not immersed in it. For example, I could see fighting to get the Chesterfield provision removed only to find out that hunting organizations like the ordinance the way it is. You might say, "nah," but that's what I thought about Sunday hunting. If it is a big issue for hunters, why haven't they tried to get this ordinance removed before? Why haven't they tried to get the underlying enabling statute removed at the General Assembly?

We are hardly throwing anyone to the wolves or leaving them to fend for themselves. There are a lot of hunting organizations out there and they can fight out these issues amongst themselves and earn their keep ;-) Meanwhile VCDL will watch all the other aspects of gun ownership.

All that said, should the hunting organizations try to fix a firearms-related hunting law while speaking in one voice, VCDL would most likely add its voice to such a chorus.

I understand all that Philip and for the most part agree, although the CHP while hunting statute was a special slap in the face and probably shouldn't be discussed in public....but the issue with Chesterfield is not a HUNTING problem even though hunters will be and were, the first to complain. It concerns anyone that has land that touches county property.

Anyway, no need to drag this out on the board. I'll pass on Chesterfield but plan on attending in some form at Goochland.
 

VCDL President

Centurion
Joined
Jun 22, 2006
Messages
600
Location
Midlothian, Virginia, USA
"CHP while hunting statute was a special slap in the face and probably shouldn't be discussed in public"

That was back in the 90s, as I recall, before there was any real open carry movement. There was NO way to carry a gun at all for self-defense while hunting and we fixed that to allow for the way that most were carrying back then (and still are today). I have no problem defending that move.
 
Top