Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 47

Thread: Jurisdictions should provide official Firearms Guides

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Virginia, US
    Posts
    190

    Jurisdictions should provide official Firearms Guides

    I'd like jurisdictions (including local jurisdictions, if they have any specific addidtions or deviations) to be compelled by law to make available on paper and online a comprehensive presentation of firearms laws/regulations/restrictions in their jurisdictions, from local to national, and include their policies and procedures for LEO interations with lawfully armed civilians.

    It's not like it's a mystery to them, because they'll be ready to charge and try you on all the laws at their disposal.
    It's not like it'd be unfair to hold them to the legal advisement the presentation would offer... because even without it, they hold us to the rules, sight unseen.

    This would serve to educate both LEO and civilians, get them on the same page, and promote peaceful coexistence, mutual adherence, and early pre-emptive pre-event discussion opportunities if something is amiss (I mean other than the obvious infringements being perpetrated).

    The scattershot placement of the mines of punishable infractions throughout code and regulations are not only onerous, but are hard to assemble and piece together. It takes herculean effort (like the great assemblages in the stickys regarding carrying in forests and parks etc, and the spreadsheets of ordinances) and we're all amazed and appreciative when someone who can proficiently do that actually does it and shares it with us. I think the onus ought to be upon the govt. to assemble and present such rules. They have the experts who made the rules, enforce the rules, and prosecute us for breaking the rules. We pay them to do all that. They need to tap an expert or two and assemble them into a presentable package.

    Despite the existence of all this information already somewhere in the ethos, we often still have to ask questions of each other, enforcers, lawyers, respresentatives, LIS, google, etc. to probe the ground ahead of us for any mines that have been laid; and sometimes we get different answers/interpretations from each source from the same question.

    If we were going by the simple shall not be infringed, it'd be easy, the way it should be.
    If the laws weren't arbitrary, but had logic in their purpose and construct, that would help.
    If a crime had to involve a victim, we could inherently sense the prohibition.
    But instead, they are scattered, require no malice, go directly against, "shall not be infringed", defy logic, and work against public safety.

    Officials need to step up to the plate and take ownership for the unConstitutional morass they've created. Bring all the infringements out into the sunshine, sweep all the dust bunny gotchas out of the corners, and set them before civilian and enforcer alike so that we can clearly see them and adhere to them or refute them.
    And take responsibility for the veracity of their presentation and description, no BS disclaimer, "this is only for information purposes", because this is our a$$ on the line.

    Online, it should be a living presentation with a growing FAQ list of interpretations and explanations.

    Here's an example of an attempt by a jurisdiction -> North Carolina Firearms Laws
    Last edited by ChristCrusader; 03-11-2014 at 01:19 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by ChristCrusader View Post
    I'd like jurisdictions (including local jurisdictions, if they have any specific addidtions or deviations) to be compelled by law to make available on paper and online a comprehensive presentation of firearms laws in their jurisdictions, from local to national, and include their policies and procedures for LEO interations with lawfully armed civilians. [ ... ]
    Who might write this compelling law overarching local and national jurisdictions, the UN? Don't we have more than enough gun related laws?

    It is the nature of progressivism to want to make-things-better rather than embracing reality as it is - or making things simpler by eliminating external controls.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Virginia, US
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Who might write this compelling law overarching local and national jurisdictions, the UN? Don't we have more than enough gun related laws?
    The local jurisdiction should provide the assemblage of already existing firearms restrictions in effect within their jurisdiction. Not suggesting somebody write new laws.

    I'd be willing to accept each jurisdiction providing only those laws specific to their jurisdiction, with the end user able to access larger parent jurisdictions' advisements as is appropriate to them.

    > Private property, business advisement of their rules
    > Local HOA advisement of their rules
    > City/town advisement of their rules
    > Forest/Park/Wildlife Management Areas advisement of their rules
    > County advisement of their rules
    > State advisement of their rules
    > Federal advisement of their rules

    Any area infringing on firearms should have a reference to the advisement, code, or regulation explaining the extent and authority of the retriction/prohibition.

    Any specific restricted area should post and cite their authority and list the extent of restriction within the notice of restriction.

    Or, we could all go back to shall not be infringed. I'd settle for that.
    Last edited by ChristCrusader; 03-10-2014 at 08:10 AM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by ChristCrusader View Post
    [ ... ] Not suggesting somebody write new laws. [ ... ]Or, we could all go back to shall not be infringed. I'd settle for that.
    I then misunderstood your "compelled."

    Your, "the end user able to access larger parent jurisdictions' advisements as is appropriate to them." suggests your personal difficulties with reading your law, as this capability is largely extant, as I tried to demonstrate with my previous citation of state and local law.

    Another point from my local political subdivision jurisdiction, it is charged in state municipal law with maintaining the health, safety and welfare of its resident citizens, and that via case law, is used as authority to limit liberties.

    Your root problem may be between "is" and "ought". Unfortunately an ought = nought.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Virginia, US
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Your, "the end user able to access larger parent jurisdictions' advisements as is appropriate to them." suggests your personal difficulties with reading your law,
    absolutely, but I don't think I'm alone

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    as this capability is largely extant, as I tried to demonstrate with my previous citation of state and local law.
    your Fairfax Police reference was close, but I did not find their policies reflecting what legally armed civilians should expect in interactions with LEO, such as mandatory relinquishing firearms at the officer's request; mandatory answering if asked about firearm posession; cause to detain, question, arrest; etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Another point from my local political subdivision jurisdiction, it is charged in state municipal law with maintaining the health, safety and welfare of its resident citizens, and that via case law, is used as authority to limit liberties.
    Yeah, all those scattered rules,restrictions need to be assembled together into a clear presentation for civilians and enforcers.
    Last edited by ChristCrusader; 03-10-2014 at 09:08 AM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,150
    In closing,, look at what we did to The Ten Commandments, then came Mosaic Law, and legal Babel.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Virginia, US
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    In closing,, look at what we did to The Ten Commandments, then came Mosaic Law, and legal Babel.
    but still, I'm not looking for expansion, but assemblying of existing restrictions/rules/regs/codes together for a single, exhaustive presentation, much like can be found in the VA forum's stickys, but those have been done by individuals at great effort, devotion, and still with ongoing input and lingering questions. Instead of having hidden mines, scattered all over our lives with barely any marking on them to identify them, the mine makers and mine deployers should provide a clear map/guide of the mines' locations.

    Once assembled, it would also be easier to lobby for restrictions' repeal, and be useful for LEO's enhanced comprehension.
    Last edited by ChristCrusader; 03-10-2014 at 09:19 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,271
    Quote Originally Posted by ChristCrusader View Post
    absolutely, but I don't think I'm alone

    your Fairfax Police reference was close, but I did not find their policies reflecting what legally armed civilians should expect in interactions with LEO, such as mandatory relinquishing firearms at the officer's request; mandatory answering if asked about firearm possession; cause to detain, question, arrest; etc.

    Yeah, all those scattered rules,restrictions need to be assembled together into a clear presentation for civilians and enforcers.
    Most cops are pretty good about not hassling OCers. The few that do do so at their own peril in most cases. Anti-gun law are easy to find. What any given cop will do is not going to be explicitly stated in any policy handbook. That one mine, in the minefield, will not be mapped, only cops will know where that mine is.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Virginia, US
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Most cops are pretty good about not hassling OCers. The few that do do so at their own peril in most cases. Anti-gun law are easy to find. What any given cop will do is not going to be explicitly stated in any policy handbook. That one mine, in the minefield, will not be mapped, only cops will know where that mine is.
    With the haphazard, patch-work quilting of different rules and procedures from one jurisdiction to the next, I think stating up front in a clear "handbook" for carriers and LEO would dispel misunderstandings buy setting expectations.
    The TX vet walking with his son was allowed to be suddenly disarmed by any means in that jurisdiction. Other jurisdictions may require some suspicion or advanced request or notification.
    I don't want to wait until an encounter to know my rights, and what to expect the LEO to have been granted permission to do, right or wrong. I'd like to have it settled before hand, and be afforded the opportunity to have it changed in writing before hand.
    Last edited by ChristCrusader; 03-10-2014 at 10:18 AM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,271
    Quote Originally Posted by ChristCrusader View Post
    With the haphazard, patch-work quilting of different rules and procedures from one jurisdiction to the next, I think stating up front in a clear "handbook" for carriers and LEO would dispel misunderstandings buy setting expectations.
    The TX vet walking with his son was allowed to be suddenly disarmed by any means in that jurisdiction. Other jurisdictions may require some suspicion or advanced request or notification.
    I don't want to wait until an encounter to know my rights, and what to expect the LEO to have been granted permission to do, right or wrong. I'd like to have it settled before hand, and be afforded the opportunity to have it changed in writing before hand.
    No arguments from me. Knowing is half the battle, so to speak. But, department policy is not law and a cop is given wide lattitude to act as he sees fit based on the facts present to him at the time. If he makes a bad call a citizen is forced to gain a redress of wrongs at a later date.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Virginia, US
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    No arguments from me. Knowing is half the battle, so to speak. But, department policy is not law and a cop is given wide lattitude to act as he sees fit based on the facts present to him at the time. If he makes a bad call a citizen is forced to gain a redress of wrongs at a later date.
    Agreed, unless his limitations in a harmless interaction are laid out to the LEO ahead of time, then we get less subjectivism, and more predictable, uniform interactions.

    Plus if it's determined and known ahead of time by the civilian to what extent his rights are diminished based on what level of encounter it is, there's the benefit of possibility avoiding escalation leading to additional charges and bandages if it's misunderstood that the LEO is acting outside his lawful authority.
    Last edited by ChristCrusader; 03-10-2014 at 10:56 AM.

  12. #12
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Most of the laws left over after preemption are hunting laws that have been twisted. A good example is no loaded long guns in vehicles, in certain localities.
    The code requires these to be listed with DGIF and published in their annual hunting regulations in order to be enforcable. That takes care of the bulk of them.

  13. #13
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,605
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    Most of the laws left over after preemption are hunting laws that have been twisted. A good example is no loaded long guns in vehicles, in certain localities.
    The code requires these to be listed with DGIF and published in their annual hunting regulations in order to be enforcable. That takes care of the bulk of them.
    Then there is this applicable in certain localities for those less equal.

    I believe those are called "sensible restrictions."

    http://§ 18.2-287.4. Carrying loaded...ited; penalty.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  14. #14
    Regular Member The Wolfhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Henrico, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    697

    And then, there is the challenge...

    Of getting jurisdictions to ADMIT to what they BELIEVE to be law and then to suffer the consequences of creating law where none actually exists. Oh, yeah, they will climb onboard this willingly....NOT! The science of footdragging will increase exponentially.

    Confusion and obfuscation are the ally of beaurocrats everywhere. I like the idea, I just see it as unrealistic.
    Last edited by The Wolfhound; 03-10-2014 at 02:45 PM.
    Appleseed, Virginia State Coordinator
    Are you a Rifleman yet?
    http://appleseedinfo.org

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

  16. #16
    Regular Member Liberty-or-Death's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    23235
    Posts
    422
    Like the laws themselves, your OP was exceedingly wordy, ironically demonstrating the absurdity of our predicament. Overall, I agree. If the courts are able to use "Ignorance of the law is no excuse"when throwing the book at someone, they (and legislators and executors) should do due diligence to make them abundantly clear to citizens and LEOs both.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
    Be active.

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    TL/DR.

    If you are willing to pay for an advisory opinion regarding case law and how it shapes the interpretation and enforcement of any particular statute, either become a legal scholar (of such ability as satisfies your desires) or hire an attorney to do the research for you and ten tell you what they think the courts meant about how the statute(s) passed by the legislative body ought to be interpreted until the next time a case comes up.

    The OP shows that they lean stongly towards the Progesssive notion of The Government needing to tell us everything about everything, and shows a desire for The Government to solve a problem regardless of the cost or the utility of the solution they demand.

    I'm going to let the curve develop before I make any decision about trollness but quite honestly it does seem that the small sample available does suggest a trend.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Virginia, US
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    Most of the laws left over after preemption are hunting laws that have been twisted. A good example is no loaded long guns in vehicles, in certain localities.
    The code requires these to be listed with DGIF and published in their annual hunting regulations in order to be enforcable. That takes care of the bulk of them.
    I don't see that extent being required, only notification to DGIF prior to enforcement:

    § 15.2-915.2. Regulation of transportation of a loaded rifle or shotgun.
    The governing body of any county or city may by ordinance make it unlawful for any person to transport, possess or carry a loaded shotgun or loaded rifle in any vehicle on any public street, road, or highway within such locality. Any violation of such ordinance shall be punishable by a fine of not more than $100. Conservation police officers, sheriffs and all other law-enforcement officers shall enforce the provisions of this section. No ordinance adopted pursuant to this section shall be enforceable unless the governing body adopting such ordinance so notifies the Director of the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries by registered mail prior to May 1 of the year in which such ordinance is to take effect.
    Last edited by ChristCrusader; 03-10-2014 at 08:48 PM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    I believe the fatal flaw in what may be a noble, if misguided, endeavor is the fact that bureaucracies relish ambiguity and tend to obfuscate what may have once been crystal clear.

    Case in point, look how far "Congress shall make no law" and "shall not be infringed" have come. These were obviously written to be closer to absolutes than suggestions, but have been circumvented by career politicians (ought = nought, as Nightmare pointed out).

    I like the idea of having government be more transparent, but the government cannot be expected to purge itself of the cancer which has taken hold of its body. For that, we must rely on the millions in this country, though they may no longer remember what distinguishes a "public servant" from "The Fed".
    Last edited by Rusty Young Man; 03-10-2014 at 08:56 PM.
    I carry to defend my loved ones; Desensitizing and educating are secondary & tertiary reasons. Anything else is unintended.

    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” - Frederic Bastiat

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." - Edmund Burke

  20. #20
    Regular Member FBrinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Henrico, VA
    Posts
    284
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    TL/DR.

    If you are willing to pay for an advisory opinion regarding case law and how it shapes the interpretation and enforcement of any particular statute, either become a legal scholar (of such ability as satisfies your desires) or hire an attorney to do the research for you and ten tell you what they think the courts meant about how the statute(s) passed by the legislative body ought to be interpreted until the next time a case comes up.

    The OP shows that they lean stongly towards the Progesssive notion of The Government needing to tell us everything about everything, and shows a desire for The Government to solve a problem regardless of the cost or the utility of the solution they demand.

    I'm going to let the curve develop before I make any decision about trollness but quite honestly it does seem that the small sample available does suggest a trend.

    stay safe.
    +1

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Liberty-or-Death View Post
    Like the laws themselves, your OP was exceedingly wordy, ironically demonstrating the absurdity of our predicament. Overall, I agree. If the courts are able to use "Ignorance of the law is no excuse"when throwing the book at someone, they (and legislators and executors) should do due diligence to make them abundantly clear to citizens and LEOs both.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
    Courts have ruled that gun owners should know all the laws regarding guns .... no kidding ... they do not take the "I did not know about that town's ordinance" excuse.

    That's why no laws is the way to go...

  22. #22
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,605
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Courts have ruled that gun owners should know all the laws regarding guns .... no kidding ... they do not take the "I did not know about that town's ordinance" excuse.

    That's why no laws is the way to go...
    Surely you do not mean to abolish the Constitution?
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  23. #23
    Lone Star Veteran DrMark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Surely you do not mean to abolish the Constitution?
    Grapeshot, if you talk to it or feed it, it will keep coming back.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Virginia, US
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    TL/DR.
    then are you qualified to comment?

    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    If you are willing to pay for an advisory opinion regarding case law and how it shapes the interpretation and enforcement of any particular statute, either become a legal scholar (of such ability as satisfies your desires) or hire an attorney to do the research for you and ten tell you what they think the courts meant about how the statute(s) passed by the legislative body ought to be interpreted until the next time a case comes up.
    I've seen lawyers pitch a good sell, only to be summarily shot down in court... that'll be $2.50 please, next case. I'd like it straight from the asses' mouths, what the deal is. I've already paid for the legislators who made the crap. I'm already paying for the lawyers who will prosecute the crap. And I'm paying for the incarceration facilities for those who fall victim to the crap. I want something for my money up front, a full disclosure infringement expose so I don't get arrested for things like being on a family nature walk or picnic for a regulation authorized by a code creating an organization about hunting ;-)

    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    The OP shows that they lean stongly towards the Progesssive notion of The Government needing to tell us everything about everything, and shows a desire for The Government to solve a problem regardless of the cost or the utility of the solution they demand.
    I count myself as conservative/libertarian. The problem is the infringements government has already created and scattered throughout their numerous laws. I demand that they assemble them into a single presentation.

    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    I'm going to let the curve develop before I make any decision about trollness but quite honestly it does seem that the small sample available does suggest a trend.
    Sorry if misunderstanding is flagging that concern. If it's merely disagreement, then so be it.
    Last edited by ChristCrusader; 03-10-2014 at 09:15 PM.

  25. #25
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,605
    Quote Originally Posted by DrMark View Post
    Grapeshot, if you talk to it or feed it, it will keep coming back.
    The is occasionally a madness to my method. What a person does with offered rope is of their own choosing.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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