• 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.

VA Law Question

flying_174

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2009
Messages
15
Location
Ashland, VA, , USA
imported post

PeteXD wrote:
Has anyone here ever been pulled over while their firearm is sitting in the passenger seat of their car?

What should be done if one were to find themselves in this situation. Get pulled over and have the pistol riding shotgun?

I don't ever plan to be pulled over, but you never know... I also don't want to have it in my holster while seated as I am right handed and it would be covered by the seat belt causing two things: 1.) possible misconception by law enforcement that the weapon is concealed because it is not in plain view. 2.) Being that the seatbelt covers it, the ease of draw is completely nullified. If a situation were to arise where I needed it quick fast and in a hurry I'd be up @#$% creek without a paddle while fiddling with my seatbelt.

I have been pulled over while OC'ing. At the time I did not have a CHP. I was pulled by an Ashland Officer for amalfunctioning tail light. It was at night, I was carrying in my holster. I am a lefty so it is still somewhat visible when holstered. He approached to notify of the light and asked for my licence and registration. As I was handing them over, with both hands clearly visible, I notified him of the firearm. He asked where it was. I told him. He then shone his flashlight at my holster and saw it. He asked if I had a CHP, I told him I did not. He then informed me that it was considered concealed, and explained why he believed that to be. Whether that was true or not was not the point then.

Never argue with an officer, better things can be done afterwards. I apologized to him, and told him I was unaware of this. He chose to run my info right there for his safety. I did not have a problem with that except that the dispatcher read back all my info across the radio.

As he let me go he said I should get a CHP. I told him that I was planing on it, but chose to OC for the time. I asked him what he believe constituted OC'ing in a vehicle. He said anywhere where it can be seen as soon as the officer approaches. I personally don't like this because it doesn't allow you anytime to notify him of it before he sees it and freaks out, if the case may be.

Bottom line is you have to remember that OC is a choice that when made you must remember that it is in part education. You must do all you can to know the laws and abide by them. But you also must remember that others may not know the laws, and this includes many officers. When OC'ing in a vehicle, which is a big grey area, you must understand that it may lead to an undesirable confrontation. Don't let it be a confrontation. The traffic stop is not the time for education, your main goal is to avoid arrest and/or weapon confiscation. Afterwards you can contact supervisors and ask them to educate the officer, and clear everything up.

I have a close friend who is 19 who OC's on a regular basis. He is pushing education much farther than a lot of us can. Many people do not know that in the state of VA you can legally carry a handgun at 18. I have talked with him quite a bit, and he understand completely that if he is pulled in a traffic stop that his chances of being arrested and the legally carried firearm being confiscated are very high. It is a decision that he has thought on and has chosen to take the responsibility of it. This is something every OC'er stepping intorarely exercisedterritories of OC must be willing to accept.

Sorry for the long post, hope it helps.
 

curtiswr

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,133
Location
Richmond, VA, ,
imported post

Citizen wrote:
Asa side note, I noticed the statute says "carries about his person", yet Pruitt's action was to store the gun. Not carry it.

I wonder why this was not brought up. Seems really obvious to me.
If you don't have a CHP and are traveling with a handgun stored in your car it has to be unloaded in a locked container separate from ammo, right?

:question:
 

ProShooter

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
4,663
Location
www.ProactiveShooters.com, Richmond, Va., , USA
imported post

curtiswr wrote:
Citizen wrote:
Asa side note, I noticed the statute says "carries about his person", yet Pruitt's action was to store the gun. Not carry it.

I wonder why this was not brought up. Seems really obvious to me.
If you don't have a CHP and are traveling with a handgun stored in your car it has to be unloaded in a locked container separate from ammo, right?

:question:
Depends on if you are "carrying" it or "transporting" it and what state your in.
 

GWRedDragon

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
252
Location
Arlington, Virginia, USA
imported post

curtiswr wrote:
Citizen wrote:
Asa side note, I noticed the statute says "carries about his person", yet Pruitt's action was to store the gun. Not carry it.

I wonder why this was not brought up. Seems really obvious to me.
If you don't have a CHP and are traveling with a handgun stored in your car it has to be unloaded in a locked container separate from ammo, right?

:question:
Is it 'about your person' and concealed? If not, in VA, it doesn't matter how it is stored. I'm not sure, but IIRC if it is inaccessible it is not 'about your person'.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
TFred wrote:
I don't have it handy, but isn't there an AG opinion or two floating around out there which make reference to the fact that OC is legal? I believe the opinion was not exactly about OC, but mentioned in passing that since OC was legal, etc, etc.

Someone should probably put together a list of references like that and make it a sticky post.

TFred

This jogged something for me.

The VA State Police website declares OC legal. Second paragraph. Note that it is not limited to "about the person while only on foot."

http://www.vsp.state.va.us/Firearms_Transporting.shtm



Your proper "chain of legal authority" begins with the VA Constitution. Article I, Section 13 is VA's "Second Amendment."

http://legis.state.va.us/Laws/search/Constitution.htm#1S1

Unless you are a prohibited person, or in a prohibited location or circumstance, (see VASP website for quick info and links to statutes) there is nothing between you and Article 1, Section 13.

As the others have said, if there is not a law against something, then it is legal.

"The VA State Police website declares OC legal."

Interesting because the Virginia State Police cannot do this. They cannot "declare" what is legal or illegal since they have no such power or authority. They can only enforce what we have decided to be legal or illegal through our representatives.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
"The VA State Police website declares OC legal."

Interesting because the Virginia State Police cannot do this. They cannot "declare" what is legal or illegal since they have no such power or authority. They can only enforce what we have decided to be legal or illegal through our representatives.
Are you talking about this line?

Virginia does not require firearm registration nor is it necessary to obtain a permit before carrying a firearm or other such weapon openly about the person except where prohibited by statute

If so, they are not "declaring" anything to be legal. They are only pointing out that no permit is required.That is simply afact.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
imported post

1. The basic law on firearms in contained in Article 1, Section 13, of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia.  Absent a statute designed to particularize the requirements of exactly how that provision may be implemented, such at 18.2-308, one may do whatever he likes by way of carrying weapons.

2. I have been in Virginia General District Courts on a number of occasions in which people were arrested and convicted for precisely the kind of behavior described in the original post.  The language in question is the phrase, "hidden from common observation";  I have always taken the position that means that if one wished to look, he'd see it.  If one failed to look or were intentionally obtuse about it (as  some cops are), then one would not see it, but that's not because it's "hidden".  Yet, I had a judge lecture me, once, in Fairfax, about how if the cop can't see the gun as he's approaching the vehicle, it's "hidden" as far as that judge was concerned, because the issue isn't the right of the driver carrying the gun, it's the safety of the police officer.  By which he really meant the cop's fear of armed traffic detainees.  I pointed out that the cop had never been the slightest bit threatened in this particular case, but the judge cut that off with, "I've made my ruling, if you don't like it, you can note your appeal."

Conclusion: it depends on the jurisdiction and the luck of the draw with respect to the cop on duty and the judge who hears the case.  And that's assuming you've got a GOOD lawyer.  And there's no question in my mind that such rulings (and as I said, I've seen more than one) are unlawful because they improperly focus on cop's apprehensions rather than the defendant's behavior, and thus a violation of the defendant's right to due process of law.  So it could boil down to how much money you've got and how far you're willing to take appeals.  I'd say that in most cases you'll be alright, as long as you don't drive that way in Northern Virginia or Norfolk/Newport News/Hampton Roads.  Tyrannical, authoritarian cultures do not like independent thought, self-reliance, or personal views of social responsibility.  (I suggest that the predominant culture in areas that have enacted strict gun control laws is made up of people who believe that The Church counts for more than their state or country, and that The Church requires compliance with the authoritarian, patriarchial, and hierarchical regime instituted thousands of years ago.  Just do what you're told, sit down, shut up, look straight ahead, no talking, and mind your own business.)

The Fourth of July, the day that commemorates Virginia's having parted company with the British Empire (thirteen years before the United States was invented), seems an appropriate time to recite the state's motto:
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
SouthernBoy wrote:
"The VA State Police website declares OC legal."

Interesting because the Virginia State Police cannot do this. They cannot "declare" what is legal or illegal since they have no such power or authority. They can only enforce what we have decided to be legal or illegal through our representatives.
Are you talking about this line?

Virginia does not require firearm registration nor is it necessary to obtain a permit before carrying a firearm or other such weapon openly about the person except where prohibited by statute

If so, they are not "declaring" anything to be legal. They are only pointing out that no permit is required.That is simply afact.

No sir. About the one where the VA State Police declared that OC is legal (in the poster's text). I was simply pointing out the fact that declaring something to be legal or not does not fall under the responsibilities of law enforcement.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

user wrote:
1. The basic law on firearms in contained in Article 1, Section 13, of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Absent a statute designed to particularize the requirements of exactly how that provision may be implemented, such at 18.2-308, one may do whatever he likes by way of carrying weapons.

2. I have been in Virginia General District Courts on a number of occasions in which people were arrested and convicted for precisely the kind of behavior described in the original post. The language in question is the phrase, "hidden from common observation"; I have always taken the position that means that if one wished to look, he'd see it. If one failed to look or were intentionally obtuse about it (as some cops are), then one would not see it, but that's not because it's "hidden". Yet, I had a judge lecture me, once, in Fairfax, about how if the cop can't see the gun as he's approaching the vehicle, it's "hidden" as far as that judge was concerned, because the issue isn't the right of the driver carrying the gun, it's the safety of the police officer. By which he really meant the cop's fear of armed traffic detainees. I pointed out that the cop had never been the slightest bit threatened in this particular case, but the judge cut that off with, "I've made my ruling, if you don't like it, you can note your appeal."

Conclusion: it depends on the jurisdiction and the luck of the draw with respect to the cop on duty and the judge who hears the case. And that's assuming you've got a GOOD lawyer. And there's no question in my mind that such rulings (and as I said, I've seen more than one) are unlawful because they improperly focus on cop's apprehensions rather than the defendant's behavior, and thus a violation of the defendant's right to due process of law. So it could boil down to how much money you've got and how far you're willing to take appeals. I'd say that in most cases you'll be alright, as long as you don't drive that way in Northern Virginia or Norfolk/Newport News/Hampton Roads. Tyrannical, authoritarian cultures do not like independent thought, self-reliance, or personal views of social responsibility. (I suggest that the predominant culture in areas that have enacted strict gun control laws is made up of people who believe that The Church counts for more than their state or country, and that The Church requires compliance with the authoritarian, patriarchial, and hierarchical regime instituted thousands of years ago. Just do what you're told, sit down, shut up, look straight ahead, no talking, and mind your own business.)

The Fourth of July, the day that commemorates Virginia's having parted company with the British Empire (thirteen years before the United States was invented), seems an appropriate time to recite the state's motto:
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!
"because the issue isn't the right of the driver carrying the gun, it's the safety of the police officer."

Wow, that's a ratherarrogant statement coming from a public servant. Nice thoughts in your conclusion and about our pending Independence Day celebration.
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
No sir. About the one where the VA State Police declared that OC is legal (in the poster's text). I was simply pointing out the fact that declaring something to be legal or not does not fall under the responsibilities of law enforcement.
Ah, my apologies then. ;)

As law enforcement.. I declare picking your nose in a moving vehicleis legal to do. I can say this because there is no law making it "illegal". Therefore... if there is no law prohibiting it.. it must be... legal.

Right?

As I recall... laws are not made to allow you to expressly do something. They are made to prohibit you but may have some exclusions attached allowing it be done by certain people or in certain situations.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
imported post

SouthernBoy wrote:
user wrote:
... Yet, I had a judge lecture me, once, in Fairfax, about how if the cop can't see the gun as he's approaching the vehicle, it's "hidden" as far as that judge was concerned, because the issue isn't the right of the driver carrying the gun, it's the safety of the police officer.  By which he really meant the cop's fear of armed traffic detainees....

"because the issue isn't the right of the driver carrying the gun, it's the safety of the police officer."



Wow, that's a rather arrogant statement coming from a public servant. Nice thoughts in your conclusion and about our pending Independence Day celebration.



 
My thoughts exactly.   Though I'd be quick to point out that most of the folks I've known who've been appointed as General District Judges are terrific attorneys, intellectually honest, well meaning and fair.  And those whom I regard as loose cannons who do whatever they feel like without any regard for law or the rights of the parties before them, are a small minority.  But they exist and can screw you up good if you've been arrested for carrying a concealed weapon, where there was any basis at all for an argument about whether or not it was, as a matter of law, concealed.
Just plain folks don't pay huge amounts of money for lobbying and elections, and mostly don't pay any attention to what either the General Assembly or the judiciary are doing, so, well, we get what we get.   There is a procedure for complaining about judges, by the way, although the people who  process the complaints get used to the fact that most folks who complain really just didn't like the verdict, and not because the judge actually did anything wrong.  But if they get enough complaints about a particular judge for improper behavior, that judge will probably not get reappointed.  That happened to a judge I knew in Fairfax.  I, personally, liked him, and enjoyed his sense of humor.  He didn't discriminate, he just didn't much like humans.  So he was always making jokes about people's race, creed, color, manner of attire, etc., and I appreciate that a defendant whose first experience in court is in front of judge who doesn't like the fact that he's Arab, Korean, or wearing sneakers in court, can be emotionally devastated.  One day I was in court and he found a guy guilty of some traffic offense, driving on the shoulder or some such thing, and he told the guy that he was sentenced to death by hanging and remanded to the custody of the Sheriff - he quickly added that he was joking and had just always wanted to say that.  But the defendant's legs went out from under him.  The judge then dismissed the case entirely.  And one day a woman showed up with a very short skirt and a very low-cut blouse, and made it a point to be flirtatious with the judge.  He blew up at her and gave her the worst sentence he could, exclaiming, "You must have an extremely low opinion of this court, thinking you could buy me off with that!  Why didn't you bring cash?"  He didn't really expect bribes, it was more of a dig at the attitude that the defendant had expressed, but that one got him into trouble, too.  Anyway, that judge was not reappointed.  But that's because of a course of conduct that got worse over a period of years and probably hundreds of complaints.  You get the drift - getting rid of a whacko judge is pretty nearly impossible, just because no one pays any real attention or holds the General Assembly's feet to the fire.


I wish they'd read the OT book of Amos, particularly 2:6-16 and 5:15, 24.
 
Top