Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Start using 15.2 915 - Activist Preemption now has teeth!!

  1. #1
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    The pre-emption law (15.2 915) now (or as of July 1) has teeth.

    This is your opportunity to get rid of old town, city or county laws which violate pre-emption.

    Here is how you can do it in three easy steps

    1) See if your town, city or county has and questionable laws with a quick search of Muni-code online

    Link:

    http://www.municode.com/RESOURCES/OnlineLibrary.asp

    Click on Virginia and a list of towns, cities and counties will appear. If your town is not on Muni-Code (Richmond comes to mind) find the code using a simple google search.

    2) Write a letter or e-mail to your elected officials if the local lawtries to do anything except reenact (copy) state firearms laws or regulate discharge of firearms. Make sure you mention the possibility of a lawsuit and new para C which allows you to collect attorney fes and court costs if you win in court.

    3) Follow up with a telephone call to the town, city or county attorney to ensure that they know you are serious.

    This is what I did in Chesapeake:

    Municode Link:

    http://www.municode.com/RESOURCES/ga...529&sid=46

    Here is the pre-emption violation:

    Sec. 46-44. Same--Persons under 18 years of age.


    (a)It shall be unlawful for any person under the age of 18 years to shoot, carry or use any firearms within the city unless a permit is first obtained from the chief of police, except when on a properly established target shooting range which is being supervised by a representative of the armed services of the United States or the state or an instructor certified by the National Rifle Association.

    (b)Application for such permit shall be made in person to the chief of police of the city and the applicant shall be accompanied by his or her parent or guardian who shall give his or her approval to the issuance of the permit.

    (c)A minor under 18 years of age shall be accompanied by an adult while hunting, except on property owned by his or her family.

    (Ord. of 11-12-63; Code 1970, ┬ž 17-61)

    Here is my e-mail to the city council:


    Good Afternoon,



    1) The City of Chesapeake has an ordnance, section 46-44 which has been pre-empted by the General Assembly under section 15.2 915 for many years.



    2) The Asst. City Attorney has been aware of this defect for more than one year.



    3) There is real danger to my children that they will be subject to arrest under this city ordnance, even though it is preempted by state code.



    4) I intend to bring suit in against the City of Chesapeake in Circuit Court on 02 July 2009 if the pre-empted statute is not struck before that date by the City Council.



    5) Please be aware that on 01 July 2009 section 15.2 915 will include new sub para C which allows courts to award reasonable attorneys fees, expenses and court costs to any person that prevails in an actionchallenging local laws that are inconflict with section 15.2 915.



    6) I hope that with a financial incentive to do so, the City of Chesapeake will finally do the right thing and amend the city code to strike section 46-44 and be in conformity with state firearms law.



    Thank you for your time.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableľand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come ůůůů. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  2. #2
    Regular Member Bubba Ron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Virginia Beach, , USA
    Posts
    883

    Post imported post

    Great idea Thundar!!!

  3. #3
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    For those who will want to refresh your memories (as did I!), the link is here:

    http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp...091+sum+HB1655

    TFred


  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Henrico County ,
    Posts
    537

    Post imported post

    Wow - Henrico County still hasa couple ofpre-empted ordinances on the books! For example, taxicab drivers are forbidden from having firearms in theirtaxi (apparently even with a CHP!). I need to spend more time to better understand the link , but assuming I am reading it correctly, I'll send a letter early next week to the County Board and attorney.

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    I'm not convinced its a good ideato start sending these lettersjust yet. We still have the veto override session of General Assembly. I'm not sure we'd want a bunch of local politicians blasting the GA and Tim-gov for a fast repeal.

    Why not wait just a bit?
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    416

    Post imported post

    Alexandria has these that caught my eye, and others re sale:

    Sec. 13-2-4 Carrying loaded firearms

    It shall be unlawful for any unauthorized person to carry a loaded firearm in any public place. (Code 1963, Sec. 41-4)

    Sec. 13-2-24 Record of pistols or revolvers sold or disposed of.


    Every person delivering or disposing of a pistol or revolver shall make in duplicate a true record of every such weapon sold or otherwise disposed of, which record shall be personally signed by the purchaser or person receiving the weapon and also by the person making the sale or disposition in the presence of each other. This record shall be in such form and shall contain such information as the chief of police may prescribe, the forms to be furnished at the expense of the city and one (1) copy thereof shall be forwarded, within seven (7) days after sale or disposition, to the chief of police. (Code 1963, Sec. 41-9)

    Sec. 6-1-1.1 Same--hunting prohibited in adjacent area.


    It shall be unlawful for any person, within 100 yards of any property line of any public park or playground in the city, to discharge or to hunt with any firearm. It shall also be unlawful for any person to traverse any area within 100 yards of any property line of any public park or playground in the city while in possession of a loaded firearm. Any person violating this section shall be guilty of a class 4 misdemeanor. (Ord. No. 3323, 9/24/88, Sec. 1)

    ARTICLE E Ammunition


    Sec. 13-2-76 Definition.

    For the purpose of this article, the term "restricted handgun ammunition" shall mean any cartridge designed primarily for use in a handgun containing a bullet that is coated with or contains in whole or in part teflon such as the KTW type, or is known commercially as "French Arcane." Nothing contained in this article shall pertain to ammunition from which the propellant has been removed or the primer has been permanently deactivated. (Ord. No. 2716, 9/28/82, Sec. 1)

    Sec. 13-2-77 Unlawful conduct.

    It shall be unlawful for any person within the city to possess, manufacture or sell restricted handgun ammunition; provided, however, that nothing contained in this article shall prohibit the sale to, purchase by or possession of any ammunition by the military or naval forces of the commonwealth or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties. (Ord. No. 2716, 9/28/82, Sec. 1)

    Sec. 13-2-78 Regulations.

    The city manager shall establish regulations for the testing and evaluation of suspected, restricted handgun ammunition, and fees therefor; shall maintain a public record of the ammunition so evaluated; and shall provide a mechanism by which all restricted handgun ammunition may be turned in to city authorities. (Ord. No. 2716, 9/28/82, Sec. 1)

    Sec. 13-2-79 Penalties.

    Any person violating any provision of this article shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than $500 or by imprisonment not exceeding six months. In addition to any penalty, the court may require any person convicted of violating the provisions of this article to give bond for one year to assure compliance with the provisions of this article. In addition to any other remedy provided herein or in place thereof, failure to comply with any provisions of this article may be enjoined by an appropriate proceeding instituted in a court of competent jurisdiction by the city attorney. (Ord. No. 2716, 9/28/82, Sec. 1)

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    Richmond is covered under Muni: http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/richmondva/

    Feel free to research it for ordinances that need to be dealt with.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "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

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    SicSemperTyrannis wrote:
    Wow - Henrico County still hasa couple ofpre-empted ordinances on the books! For example, taxicab drivers are forbidden from having firearms in theirtaxi (apparently even with a CHP!). I need to spend more time to better understand the link , but assuming I am reading it correctly, I'll send a letter early next week to the County Board and attorney.
    Taxi drivers are listed as Conservators of the Peace under 18.2-308, C4 and can only carry if they have a CHP. Go get them!
    C. This section shall also not apply to any of the following individuals while in the discharge of their official duties, or while in transit to or from such duties:

    1. Carriers of the United States mail;

    2. Officers or guards of any state correctional institution;

    3. [Repealed.]

    4. Conservators of the peace, except that an attorney for the Commonwealth or assistant attorney for the Commonwealth may carry a concealed handgun pursuant to subdivision B 9. However, the following conservators of the peace shall not be permitted to carry a concealed handgun without obtaining a permit as provided in subsection D hereof: (a) notaries public; (b) registrars; (c) drivers, operators or other persons in charge of any motor vehicle carrier of passengers for hire; or (d) commissioners in chancery;
    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "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

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    I'm not convinced its a good ideato start sending these lettersjust yet. We still have the veto override session of General Assembly. I'm not sure we'd want a bunch of local politicians blasting the GA and Tim-gov for a fast repeal.

    Why not wait just a bit?
    Governor Timmy had his opportunity to veto this, and he chose not to. THere is nothing to do but wait for 7/1/09 when this law becomes effective.

    IMHO it is only helping localities clear up local laws that conflict with state law before the date when they will have to start paying court & legal costs if sued to do so. Just good civic duty in these tight financial times, if you ask me.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "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

  10. #10
    Regular Member ODA 226's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Etzenricht, Germany
    Posts
    1,598

    Post imported post

    Bubba Ron wrote:
    Great idea Thundar!!!
    + 1,000,000!
    Bitka Sve ReÜava!
    B-2-10 SFG(A)/ A-2-11 SFG(A) 1977-1994

  11. #11
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    It drives me nuts that people keep calling this "pre-emption", as though the local ordinances were somehow effective. This isn't "pre-emption", because local ordinances enacted in excess of the power to do so are void.

    There are jurisdictions that pretty much do what they want to, on the theory that they can cause you so much trouble, even if it's unlawful for them to do so, that you'll either knuckle under or leave town. In other words, they know perfectly well that ordinance is void, and legally unenforceable. They don't care, because it's too hard for you to fight with them about it.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  12. #12
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,616

    Post imported post

    skidmark wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    I'm not convinced its a good ideato start sending these lettersjust yet. We still have the veto override session of General Assembly. I'm not sure we'd want a bunch of local politicians blasting the GA and Tim-gov for a fast repeal.

    Why not wait just a bit?
    Governor Timmy had his opportunity to veto this, and he chose not to. THere is nothing to do but wait for 7/1/09 when this law becomes effective.

    IMHO it is only helping localities clear up local laws that conflict with state law before the date when they will have to start paying court & legal costs if sued to do so. Just good civic duty in these tight financial times, if you ask me.
    My reading of this is that the courts may allow recovery of your legal fees & court costs - not shall or will allow.

    Did I miss something?

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.ö Archilochus, 650 BC

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

  13. #13
    Regular Member Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greene County
    Posts
    3,844

    Post imported post

    These are baby teeth!
    If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
    The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.


    ~Alan Korwin

  14. #14
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    Grapeshot wrote:
    skidmark wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    I'm not convinced its a good idea┬*to start sending these letters┬*just yet.┬*┬* We still have the veto override session of General Assembly.┬* I'm not sure we'd want a bunch of local politicians blasting the GA and Tim-gov for a fast repeal.

    Why not wait just a bit?
    Governor Timmy had his opportunity to veto this, and he chose not to.┬* THere is nothing to do but wait for 7/1/09 when this law becomes effective.

    IMHO it is only helping localities clear up local laws that conflict with state law before the date when they will have to start paying court & legal costs if sued to do so.┬* Just good civic duty in these tight financial times, if you ask me.
    My reading of this is that the courts may allow recovery of your legal fees & court costs - not shall or will allow.

    Did I miss something?

    ┬*┬*┬*┬*┬*┬*┬*┬*┬*┬*┬* Yata hey
    Well, costs of litigation are always recoverable, by statute. However, what the courts "may" award is "a reasonable legal fee", not necessarily what you've paid. I had a case once where the consumer protection statute sued under provided such reimbursement, and where I'd put about six thousand dollars' worth of work into it (because the scum bags made it so hard to sue them), only to have a General District Court judge rule that $300 was reasonable, because the plaintiff was "only a consumer". My clients would have been stuck twice, once by the retailer and once by the judge if I hadn't been willing to take the judge's "sticking". I suspect that the courts will find "a reasonable attorneys' fee" a highly manipulable concept in this context.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  15. #15
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    user wrote:
    Grapeshot wrote:
    skidmark wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    I'm not convinced its a good ideato start sending these lettersjust yet. We still have the veto override session of General Assembly. I'm not sure we'd want a bunch of local politicians blasting the GA and Tim-gov for a fast repeal.

    Why not wait just a bit?
    Governor Timmy had his opportunity to veto this, and he chose not to. THere is nothing to do but wait for 7/1/09 when this law becomes effective.

    IMHO it is only helping localities clear up local laws that conflict with state law before the date when they will have to start paying court & legal costs if sued to do so. Just good civic duty in these tight financial times, if you ask me.
    My reading of this is that the courts may allow recovery of your legal fees & court costs - not shall or will allow.

    Did I miss something?

    Yata hey
    Well, costs of litigation are always recoverable, by statute. However, what the courts "may" award is "a reasonable legal fee", not necessarily what you've paid. I had a case once where the consumer protection statute sued under provided such reimbursement, and where I'd put about six thousand dollars' worth of work into it (because the scum bags made it so hard to sue them), only to have a General District Court judge rule that $300 was reasonable, because the plaintiff was "only a consumer". My clients would have been stuck twice, once by the retailer and once by the judge if I hadn't been willing to take the judge's "sticking". I suspect that the courts will find "a reasonable attorneys' fee" a highly manipulable concept in this context.
    I hope that "may" can be changed to "shall" in a future year with a more friendly governor. Same with the gun buy-back bill, although it is clear that Kaine didn't even understand that it was "may" and not "shall".

    TFred


  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    52

    Post imported post

    Thundar wrote:
    2) Write a letter or e-mail to your elected officials if the local lawtries to do anything except reenact (copy) state firearms laws or regulate discharge of firearms. Make sure you mention the possibility of a lawsuit and new para C which allows you to collect attorney fes and court costs if you win in court.
    State preemption covers laws regarding the discharge of firearms?

    I didn't know that...

    I would assume that would be covered under noise regulations anyway, right?

  17. #17
    Regular Member TexasNative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    856

    Post imported post

    KimberG19 wrote:
    Thundar wrote:
    2) Write a letter or e-mail to your elected officials if the local lawtries to do anything except reenact (copy) state firearms laws or regulate discharge of firearms. Make sure you mention the possibility of a lawsuit and new para C which allows you to collect attorney fes and court costs if you win in court.
    State preemption covers laws regarding the discharge of firearms?

    I didn't know that...

    I would assume that would be covered under noise regulations anyway, right?
    It's just the reverse, and that's why Thundar included that phrase. There are only a few areas of firearm law where localities are allowed to intervene. Among those are discharge of a firearm and hunting, if I remember correctly.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    Chesapeake has acknowledged my e-mail, now I am just waiting for a response.

    Here it is:

    Re: Future Action and Liability of the City of Chesapeake

    From:

    "Dolores Moore" <dmoore@cityofchesapeake.net>



    To: "xxxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxxxx@yahoo.com>



    Mr. xxxxxxxxxxxx:



    Thank you for contacting the Chesapeake City Council with your comments on City Code Section 46-44. Your email has been provided to the City Council members and tothe City Attorney's Office for response.


    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableľand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come ůůůů. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  19. #19
    Regular Member IanB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    1,896

    Post imported post

    Jonesy wrote:
    Alexandria has these that caught my eye...
    I think Mayor Euille is gonna be hating me come this summer. I have politely asked twice that they bring the city code into line. Also, York County ignored my requests to ammend their code. Someone in York should work on them once July approaches.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,156

    Post imported post

    Agent19 wrote:
    These are baby teeth!
    Better than no teeth

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bottom of Suffolk, VA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    So when the code for a city has an invalid ordinance still on the books, but followed by the quote below, what does that mean? Shouldn't the law just be "off" the books?

    Editor's note: The authority of the city to require a permit for the purchase of a handgun was repealed by the 2004 Session of the Virginia General Assembly. Therefore, section 54-121 is no longer enforceable and is declared invalid.

Posting Permissions

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