Spread Sheet - County/City Ordinances - Stop & ID, CHP Reqs, Airguns, & Park Bans

Wolf_shadow · Sep 8, 2011

I am willing to contact Accomack County on the fingerprint issue, but need some stats on how many or percentage of Cities/Counties that do not require fingerprinting. I know I've seen it but can't find now for the life of me. (googlefu out of order)

Sesrun · Sep 8, 2011

Blk97F150 said:
Culpeper is shown on the list under the 'park ban' column of the spreadsheet....

This is the code section... maybe I'm missing something, but other then the title, I don't see where firearms are mentioned/prohibited?

Sec. 10B-34. - Guns, knives, bows and arrows, or fireworks; prohibited.

No person shall possess in a designated County park, facility, or field, a slingshot, bow/arrow, or other high-speed projectiles. Possession or discharge of explosive devices other than fireworks in the park, facility, or field is prohibited except for a Department-sponsored activity in designated areas at designated times. Knives or swords with blades of three (3) or more inches in length are prohibited except for food preparation.

Pursuant to Virginia Code Sections 15.2-1209 and 1210, the Board of Supervisors finds that Spilman Park and Galbreath-Marshall field are designated parks and recreational areas subject to the jurisdiction of the County Parks and Recreations Department, are so heavily populated as to make the shooting of firearms and hunting with firearms to be dangerous to persons using such park and recreational area and the inhabitants in and around such area.

No firearms may be discharged in a County designated park or recreational area subject to the jurisdiction of the County Parks and Recreation Department, or within one-half mile of such park or recreation area, except by a law enforcement officer or military personnel in the lawful performance of their duties, or by any other person to lawfully prevent the loss of life or serious bodily injury. Signs to such effect shall be placed at appropriate points on the boundary of such parks and recreational areas.

Maybe I'm reading too much into the law but I believe firearms and ammunition would fall under the "other high-speed projectiles" of which possession is banned as well as "explosive devices" given the way ammunition is designed.

TFred · Sep 8, 2011

Wolf_shadow said:
I am willing to contact Accomack County on the fingerprint issue, but need some stats on how many or percentage of Cities/Counties that do not require fingerprinting. I know I've seen it but can't find now for the life of me. (googlefu out of order)

Actually, I don't know that we've ever seen solid numbers on this. I think we've seen estimates. This spreadsheet should be one way of helping us to nail that actual number down.

TFred

Blk97F150 · Sep 8, 2011

Sesrun said:
Maybe I'm reading too much into the law but I believe firearms and ammunition would fall under the "other high-speed projectiles" of which possession is banned as well as "explosive devices" given the way ammunition is designed.

You may be right... but the way its worded, I'll let someone else work that one. I've already poked a couple bees nests, and have more in mind for the future... :banana:

Thundar · Sep 9, 2011

cyras21 said:
I say the more the merrier. I email 7 of the 13 counties pertaining to park carry last night and plan on writing the others tonight.

King William County
from Trenton Funkhouser countyadmin@kingwilliamcounty.us
to Clement <cyras21@gmail.com>
cc tredd@kingwilliamcounty.us,
dwright@kingwilliamcounty.us,
cschools@kingwilliamcounty.us,
tsmiley@kingwilliamcounty.us
date Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:28 PM
subject RE: County Code - Dangerous Devices
mailed-by kingwilliamcounty.us
Important mainly because it was sent directly to you.
hide details 2:28 PM (2 hours ago)
I will forward your e-mail to the County Attorney for consideration and, following such consideration, can advise you of what action(s) the County intends to take in this matter.

Thank you for sharing your concern/question with me.

Trenton L. Funkhouser, AICP, CM
County Administrator
King William County
Post Office Box 215
180 Horse Landing Road
King William VA, 23086
(804) 769-4926
(804) 769-4964 fax
countyadmin@kingwilliamcounty.us
www.kingwilliamcounty.us

Roanoke County
from Paul Mahoney pmahoney@roanokecountyva.gov
to Clement <cyras21@gmail.com>,
Roanoke County Admistration <administration@roanokecountyva.gov>,
Board of Supervisors <BOS@roanokecountyva.gov>,
Michael Winston <MWINSTON@roanokecountyva.gov>
date Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 8:36 AM
subject Re: County Code
mailed-by roanokecountyva.gov
Important mainly because of your interaction with messages in the conversation.
hide details 8:36 AM (8 hours ago)
Dear Mr. Bourg:

Thank you for your inquiry regarding Roanoke County's Ordinance Section 15-8 which governs prohibited uses or conduct in our county's parks. The Virginia Code section 15.2-915 to which you make reference makes specific exception for local ordinances relating to firearms which are expressly authorized by state statute. Roanoke County's ordinance specifically incorporates that provision. This office had carefully considered the legislation adopted by the Virginia General Assembly, and analyzed that legislation with reference to existing County Code provisions. In March of 2008 we recommended that the Board of Supervisors consider an amendment to Section 15-8 of the Roanoke County Code to bring it in to compliance with Section 15.2-915 of the Code of Virginia. The Board accepted our recommendation and adopted Ordinance #032508-7. This amendment cured any infirmity.
Roanoke County makes every effort to insure that our county code is in compliance with the requirements of Virginia law. Thank you again for your inquiry.

Paul M. Mahoney
Roanoke County Attorney

Mr. Mahoney,

I reread Roanoke's code.

Since no State legislation prohibits a person lawfully allowed to poses a firearm from carrying said firearm in any park, Roanoke's ordinance is confusing and maybe purposely misleading.

As written Roanoke's code is an injustice to the people wishing to enjoy the outdoors while taking the responsibility of their personal protection in their hands.

Shame on Roanoke!

from Barbara Notar BNotar@leesburgva.gov
to Clement <cyras21@gmail.com>
cc John Wells <JWells@leesburgva.gov>,
Kristen Umstattd <KUmstattd@leesburgva.gov>
date Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 9:29 AM
subject RE: Town Code
mailed-by leesburgva.gov
Important mainly because it was sent directly to you.
hide details 9:29 AM (7 hours ago)

Town of Leesburg
Mr. Bourg,

The Town Code was amended in June to comport with the State Code. Municode updates the Town Code online on a quarterly basis so the amendments are not yet reflected on the website. To read several code amendments that occurred in June, click on Ordinance No. 2011-O-013 on the Town website. In the meantime, the section you cite in your email now states:

Sec. 26-24 (5) Hunting and firearms.

No person in a park shall hunt, trap or pursue wildlife at any time. No person within a park shall carry or possess bow and arrows, slings, or similar weapon or any kind of trapping device. Discharging firearms into park areas from beyond park property boundaries is forbidden. Discharging a firearm in violation of Virginia Code Section 18.2-280 is prohibited. No person within a park shall conceal weapons in violation of Virginia Code Section 18.2-308. No person shall discharge a pneumatic gun in the park pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.2-915.4.

If you have any further questions or comments, please let me know.

Barbara Notar

Barbara Notar
Deputy Town Attorney
Town of Leesburg
25 W. Market St.
PO Box 88
Leesburg, VA 20178
703-737-7000 (phone)
703-737-7025 (fax)
bnotar@leesburgva.gov

I recommend an open carry event in the county attorney's office where we can give him an English lesson.

Blk97F150 · Sep 9, 2011

I am currently working the following:

Fauquier County (air gun) - Issue has been forwarded to Board of Supervisors

Spotsylvania County (air gun) - County is in the process of changing code to comply. (WHOOHOOO!! :banana: )

City of Manassas Park (air gun) - Governing Body is researching the issue

Caroline County (park gun ban) - Sent initial email to county BOS.

Fiarfax City (air gun) - Sent initial email to Mayor & Council

I might jump into a few other areas too....

(OCDC should really go back to the old icons... the previous 'cool' looked MUCH better! lol)

Edit to add Fairfax City

Sesrun · Sep 9, 2011

The response from Roanoke County Attorney Paul Mahoney is a sham and has the exact wording from the two responses he sent me back in June. Roanoke County really needs to have the record set straight and actually have its Attorney respond to inquires instead of just copying and pasting past responses. It is a shame that Paul Mahoney does not take our inquires seriously and shows that the presence of like minds (some OCing hopefully) at a BOS meeting may be necessary for our voice to be heard.

Blk97F150 · Sep 9, 2011

Can this portion of 15.2-915 be used to help Roanoke correct the issue with their laws?

C. In addition to any other relief provided, the court may award reasonable attorney fees, expenses, and court costs to any person, group, or entity that prevails in an action challenging (i) an ordinance, resolution, or motion as being in conflict with this section or (ii) an administrative action taken in bad faith as being in conflict with this section.

TFred · Sep 9, 2011

Blk97F150 said:
Can this portion of 15.2-915 be used to help Roanoke correct the issue with their laws?

Sure, but only after someone has taken the time and expense to file suit.

One good purpose of this state-wide effort is to gather the evidence of wide-spread non-compliance (if it does exist) in support of pushing for a "Florida style" preemption law, which has teeth you wouldn't believe.

See snippet of linked article:

The Florida State legislature has taken steps towards securing Second Amendment rights by eliminating restrictions on firearms. The measures, which will be enacted on October 1, will impose penalties on public officials who pass or enforce gun regulations at the state level. Violators face a $5,000 personal fine and may risk being removed from office by the governor. Florida already had a law that made it illegal to pass gun regulations beyond those imposed through state statutes since 1987. The Blaze explains the necessity for this new law:

While Florida has had a law on its books since 1987 that makes it illegal to pass gun regulations beyond state statutes, there was no enforcement mechanism in place. As a result, towns and cities have created ordinances at will. In the process, many of them have criminalized otherwise completely law-abiding citizens who unintentionally ran afoul of arbitrary, localized gun rules.

If we find a significant number of Virginia localities are likewise thumbing their collective noses at the General Assembly, this is something we should push for.

TFred

Blk97F150 · Sep 9, 2011

TFred said:
Sure, but only after someone has taken the time and expense to file suit.

It will probably need to come to that. At least for a couple jurisdictions. The Virginia code does allow for the award of legal fees, and costs associated to a lawsuit.... so while some money may need to be paid up front, there is a decent chance that it will get repaid.

It will be interesting to watch the first test case.... if not actually participate in it.

TFred · Sep 9, 2011

From the latest VA-ALERT! This is just what we need to tip this over to a state-wide campaign!

TFred

*************************************************
22. VCDL members/gun owners fixing preemption statewide! YOU can help
*************************************************

Ryan Bruch decided to pour over Municode looking for Virginia localities that have preempted gun laws on their books dealing with air guns and parks. It was quite an effort. He published a spreadsheet with all the pertinent information.

VCDL is helping coordinate gun owners in contacting the various localities to have their offending ordinances either fixed or removed from the books.

If you are interested in handling one of the localities that is in violation, first makes sure that column D for that locality is not colored. If it is, then someone else is already working on that locality.

If it is not colored, let me know that you are taking on the task of working with the locality to remove or fix the offending ordinance(s). Also keep me apprised of any responses so I know the status of that locality (contacted, acknowledged, fixed problem, refuses to fix problem). That information is also kept in the spreadsheet so all can see a locality's status at a glance.

If a locality refuses to fix the problem, VCDL will then look at stepping in to get compliance.

Most localities are fixing the problem when notified and doing so in a polite and professional manner. Your mileage might vary, however. Either way, please treat them courteously and assume they will fix the problem without a fight.

Here is the spreadsheet of localities:

http://tinyurl.com/4yygqp2

TFred · Sep 15, 2011

The City of Fredericksburg is in the process of updating their local ordinance on pneumatic guns.

I attended this past Tuesday's council meeting, where the first read of the new ordinance was placed in the City Manager's agenda. The City Manager turned the floor over to the City Attorney, who presented the ordinance.

After carefully listening to the presentation, the Mayor casually observed, "we don't really have a choice, do we?" The council immediately proceeded to vote their unanimous approval on first read. I expect the second read will pass on the consent agenda during the next council meeting, on September 27th.

Of particular interest were some statistics that the City Attorney had gathered from the Police Department. During the past year, 4 arrests have been made for violations of the current pneumatic gun ordinance. 3 of the 4 would have still been violations under the new ordinance, and the 4th turned out to be a violation of another law, if I understood her correctly. The point she was making is that for at least the past year, nobody did anything in the city that was illegal under the old ordinance that would suddenly be legal under the new ordinance. That seemed to be a good point.

TFred

Blk97F150 · Sep 16, 2011

Great news Fred. Do you have a copy/transcript of the new city code?

TFred · Sep 16, 2011

Blk97F150 said:
Great news Fred. Do you have a copy/transcript of the new city code?

Sorry for the delay... busy day at work today.

Agenda from last Tuesday's meeting.

Agenda Item 10.B: Ordinance 11-__, First Read, Updating the City Code Provisions on Pneumatic Guns to Conform to State Law by Amending Fredericksburg City Code, Chapter 54, “Miscellaneous Offenses," Section 54-6, “Use of Air Rifles, Slingshots and Similar Devices”

TFred

Blk97F150 · Sep 16, 2011

Thats great! :banana: Thanks for the update.

So far out of all the localities that I have contacted, 6 have admitted their current code wasn't in compliance and have taken steps to work on an update.... another one has previously corrected the issue before my contacting them. (I'll post a full summary update of all the localities sometime this weekend).

Blk97F150 · Sep 16, 2011

The City Attorney for Williamsburg VA has notified me that the City Council has adopted ammendments to their 'air gun' code that brings them into compliance with state law. WOOHOO! :banana:

Memo from the City Attorney to the Mayor & Council:
http://williamsburg-va.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=116&meta_id=3532

The final/new bill adopted by the City Council:
http://williamsburg-va.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=116&meta_id=3534

Next month the City Council is going to consider ammendments/repeal these two city codes as well. (basically 'park/public gun bans'). I will keep this issue on my 'follow up' list to determine the actions taken.

Sec. 10-126. Transporting a loaded rifle or shotgun.
(a) No person shall transport, possess or carry a loaded shotgun or loaded rifle in any vehicle on any public street, road or highway within the city. Any person violating this section shall upon conviction be fined not more than $100.00.
(b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to:
(1) Duly authorized law enforcement officers or military personnel in the performance of their lawful duties; and
(2) Any person who reasonably believes that a loaded rifle or loaded shotgun is necessary for his personal safety in the course of his employment or business.

Sec. 13-124. Possession or discharge of firearms or weapons.
No person other than authorized personnel shall carry or discharge any dangerous or deadly weapons or firearms of any description.

TFred · Sep 16, 2011

Blk97F150 said:
The final/new bill adopted by the City Council:
http://williamsburg-va.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=116&meta_id=3534

Interesting though... from the final bill linked above we find:

"Notwithstanding the existence of one or more of the above-described barriers, the discharge of projectiles across or over the bounds of the property shall create the rebuttable presumption that the use of the pneumatic gun or gravel shooter was not conducted with reasonable care."

I wonder what gives them the authority to codify this opinion? I'm guessing they don't have it. There's nothing in the state code which grants this assumption.

TFred

Blk97F150 · Sep 17, 2011

TFred said:
Interesting though... from the final bill linked above we find:

"Notwithstanding the existence of one or more of the above-described barriers, the discharge of projectiles across or over the bounds of the property shall create the rebuttable presumption that the use of the pneumatic gun or gravel shooter was not conducted with reasonable care."

I wonder what gives them the authority to codify this opinion? I'm guessing they don't have it. There's nothing in the state code which grants this assumption.

TFred

No idea. I suspect that since the Va Code mentions one must use 'reasonable care' to stop the projectile from crossing a property line... that they made the assumption that if/when a projectile does cross that property line, then the person must not have used 'reasonable care'.

If you would like to ask the City Attorney for her 'legal basis', I'd be happy to give you her email address and phone number....

user · Sep 18, 2011

I'm always up for a case where there's a statutory award of attorneys' fees. Makes it easier, though courts sometimes punish such litigation by ruling that it is the judgment of the court that a reasonable attorney's fee is three hundred dollars. I'd love to appeal such a ruling, though I've never had a client willing to do so.

TFred · Sep 18, 2011

user said:
I'm always up for a case where there's a statutory award of attorneys' fees. Makes it easier, though courts sometimes punish such litigation by ruling that it is the judgment of the court that a reasonable attorney's fee is three hundred dollars. I'd love to appeal such a ruling, though I've never had a client willing to do so.

That might be reasonable if you want to hire an attorney that will LOSE for you!

TFred

Spread Sheet - County/City Ordinances - Stop & ID, CHP Reqs, Airguns, & Park Bans

Activist Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member