-
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.
-
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.
Fauquier County parks firearms prohibition...
- Thread starter roscoe13
- Start date
altajava
Newbie
That's not uncommon in counties that don't have big budgets. It wasn't that long ago when Fairfax charged non county cars as well. There are a couple of DGIF parks around, free to everyone but not OC friendly with out a permit.
PaulX608
Regular Member
Does this apply to buildings within Fauquier's P&R system as well as open-air parks? Considering attending an event at a facility that is part of their Central Region and is located within the Town of Warrnenton. Event will likely be indoors at that facility.
PaulX608
Regular Member
Thank you sir! I Got an email from the superindentent of the Eastern and Central regions of Fauquier's P&R, a Keith A. Meyerl, which included this:
Sec. 16-7. - Firearms, knives, weapons, fireworks and explosives.
(a)
It shall be unlawful for any person except a duly authorized law enforcement officer to have in his possession in any park any BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow, or dart device, or to discharge any pistol, revolver, shotgun, BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow or dart device or other weapon in which the propelling force is gunpowder, a spring or air.
and this:
(b)
Any violation of section 16-5 (permits for solicitors and vendors); section 16-6 (prohibited conduct); section 16-7 (firearms, knives, weapons, fireworks and explosives); or section 16-8 (vehicles) shall be punishable by a fine of not less than fifty dollars ($50.00), nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or imprisonment for a term not exceeding thirty (30) days, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
Should I bother replying with information about preemption? Or just carry with the knowledge that this Sec. 16-7 is unenforceable?
Last edited:
jmelvin
Founder's Club Member
Yes, please reply. If you need a template feel free to copy my wording from the e-mail I sent to the Madison County Fair Board in a recent thread about the Madison County Fair.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...adison-County-Fair-Unfriendly-July-12-16-2011
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...adison-County-Fair-Unfriendly-July-12-16-2011
Last edited:
TFred
Regular Member
I don't believe that section violates preemption. Preemption covers carry and possession, but not discharge. Their sections on carry and possession do not include firearms.
TFred
PaulX608
Regular Member
Actually, now that I re-read this Sec. 16-7 that was sent to me by Mr. Meyerl, it is clear that it has been amended. Note that the Municode says this:
Sec. 16-7. Firearms, knives, weapons, fireworks and explosives.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to have in his possession or discharge in any park any pistol, revolver, shotgun, BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow, dart device, or other weapon in which the propelling force is gunpowder, a spring or air, except as may be carried by a duly authorized law enforcement officer.
which seemes to indicate that only a LEO can possess or discharge any of the listed devices. But, the version I received from Mr. Meyerl it says this:
Sec. 16-7. - Firearms, knives, weapons, fireworks and explosives.
(a)
It shall be unlawful for any person except a duly authorized law enforcement officer to have in his possession in any park any BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow, or dart device, or to discharge any pistol, revolver, shotgun, BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow or dart device or other weapon in which the propelling force is gunpowder, a spring or air.
It looks to me as though it's been amended so that someone other than a LEO can carry(but not discharge) a pistol, revolver, or shotgun. It clearly excludes those items from the possession portion of the list.
Sec. 16-7. Firearms, knives, weapons, fireworks and explosives.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to have in his possession or discharge in any park any pistol, revolver, shotgun, BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow, dart device, or other weapon in which the propelling force is gunpowder, a spring or air, except as may be carried by a duly authorized law enforcement officer.
which seemes to indicate that only a LEO can possess or discharge any of the listed devices. But, the version I received from Mr. Meyerl it says this:
Sec. 16-7. - Firearms, knives, weapons, fireworks and explosives.
(a)
It shall be unlawful for any person except a duly authorized law enforcement officer to have in his possession in any park any BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow, or dart device, or to discharge any pistol, revolver, shotgun, BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow or dart device or other weapon in which the propelling force is gunpowder, a spring or air.
It looks to me as though it's been amended so that someone other than a LEO can carry(but not discharge) a pistol, revolver, or shotgun. It clearly excludes those items from the possession portion of the list.
PaulX608
Regular Member
Thanks, I just noticed the difference myself. I was slower to post than you, though!
Red highlights.....
Edit: I read it again.... & see what you guys are talking about now.
Last edited:
I'd let him know he doesn't know the law and what it is.
Maybe but I think it's just poor wording.
Of course it's poor wording. The GA made them take out firearms, but that's all they had to do. Keeping it confusing makes folks wonder just what they are being told they cannot do, and the safest thing is to do nothing. WIN for the County.
stay safe.
TFred
Regular Member
English should use parentheses, like math.
It shall be unlawful for any person (except a duly authorized law enforcement officer) to (have in his possession in any park any (BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow, or dart device)), or to (discharge any (pistol, revolver, shotgun, BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow or dart device or other weapon in which the propelling force is gunpowder, a spring or air)).
See, when you break out the parts like that, it is easy to see the mistakes. This ordinance literally prohibits the discharge of any weapon, period. The qualifier "in any park" is missing from the discharge clause! Technically, that makes it in violation of the new air-gun law, and without a provision for self-defense, probably violates the Second Amendment, but I doubt that was anyone's intent.
TFred
It shall be unlawful for any person (except a duly authorized law enforcement officer) to (have in his possession in any park any (BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow, or dart device)), or to (discharge any (pistol, revolver, shotgun, BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow or dart device or other weapon in which the propelling force is gunpowder, a spring or air)).
See, when you break out the parts like that, it is easy to see the mistakes. This ordinance literally prohibits the discharge of any weapon, period. The qualifier "in any park" is missing from the discharge clause! Technically, that makes it in violation of the new air-gun law, and without a provision for self-defense, probably violates the Second Amendment, but I doubt that was anyone's intent.
TFred
JamesCanby
Activist Member
English should use parentheses, like math.
It shall be unlawful for any person (except a duly authorized law enforcement officer) to (have in his possession in any park any (BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow, or dart device)), or to (discharge any (pistol, revolver, shotgun, BB gun, air gun, slingshot, bow and arrow or dart device or other weapon in which the propelling force is gunpowder, a spring or air)).
See, when you break out the parts like that, it is easy to see the mistakes. This ordinance literally prohibits the discharge of any weapon, period. The qualifier "in any park" is missing from the discharge clause! Technically, that makes it in violation of the new air-gun law, and without a provision for self-defense, probably violates the Second Amendment, but I doubt that was anyone's intent.
TFred
So.... if I understand this regulation correctly, I may carry a firearm in one of their parks but I may not fire it, even for self defense. Seems like this County regulation really needs a lot of work.
TFred
Regular Member
As I read it, the ordinance says you may carry a firearm in any park, but you may not discharge it anywhere in the entire county, for any reason whatsoever. I do not believe that was the intent, but that is how the ordinance reads. So yes, I would agree, it needs to be completely rewritten.
TFred