• 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.

Searched and seized handgun

Mike Frye

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2010
Messages
16
Location
Virginia Beach
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You will probably want to keep this email, as it describes the new
Virginia gun laws GOING INTO EFFECT ON JULY 1. There are some items
here that you most likely are unaware of, so I highly recommend that
you READ THIS ALERT IN ITS ENTIRETY.
Areas affected by the new laws:

RESTAURANTS AND CLUBS THAT SERVE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
Starting July 1, CHP holders can carry concealed in restaurants and
clubs that serve alcoholic beverages for on premise consumption,
however the CHP holder cannot drink alcoholic beverages while carrying
concealed. Police officers, on and off duty, as well as Commonwealth
Attorneys, can carry concealed and drink responsibly.
There is NO requirement to notify anyone that you are carrying
concealed in a restaurant or club and VCDL recommends taking a 'don't
ask, don't tell' policy. The restaurant or club has the right to
notify customers that guns are prohibited, or that a particular type
of carry is prohibited (such as 'no open carry' or, perhaps, 'open
carry only'). Regardless, if there was no obvious signage posted or
you were not told verbally that guns are not allowed, you are NOT
required to ask permission and I suggest that you don't - just go
about your business.
Open carry remains unchanged by the new law and allows for responsible
consumption of alcoholic beverages.

MOTOR VEHICLES AND VESSELS
For those who do not have a CHP, starting July 1 they can have a
loaded handgun with them concealed in their motor vehicle or vessel as
long as the handgun is secured in a container (such as a zipped bag,
closed gun case, closed briefcase, etc.) or in a compartment
(glovebox, console, etc.).


NOTE: Remember that if you don't have a CHP, you generally can't
carry a handgun in such a closed container OUTSIDE of your motor
vehicle or vessel.

K-12 SCHOOLS
The new vehicle carry law, above, has an additional benefit for BOTH
CHP holders and non-CHP holders. Under the law effective July 1, a
loaded handgun can be kept in a secured container or a secured
compartment in a motor vehicle while on K-12 school property.
The new vehicle carry law (18.2-308 B 10) is in the list of general
exemptions from the concealed weapon law. Police officers and
Commonwealth Attorneys, for example, are listed in 18.2-308 B. The key
is that in the third paragraph of the K-12 school weapons law
(18.2-308.1) it says that anyone exempted from the concealed weapon
law is also exempted from the ban on guns on K-12 school property.
Thus, as long as your loaded handgun is in a secured compartment or a
secured container BEFORE you pull onto school property and REMAINS
SECURED in that compartment or container UNTIL AFTER you pull off the
property, you are legal.

In case those of you with CHPs are wondering why you can't carry
outside of your vehicle on K-12 school property, that's because the
CHP wording (18.2-308 D) is NOT in the list of exemptions to the
concealed weapon law (18.2-308 B and 18.2-308 C). Instead, you can
think of your CHP as a 'get out of jail free' card. You are not
actually exempted from the concealed carry law, but you have an
affirmative defense against any prosecution.
I think we should be working to exempt CHP holders from the concealed
weapon law.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT MEETINGS IN COURTHOUSES
A few County Board of Supervisors, such as in Sussex, currently hold
their public meetings in a courthouse at night, which thus prohibits
the otherwise lawful carry of self-defense handguns. During the
session a not-to-be-named Delegate told me about a bill that was
totally unrelated to firearms that would help with that problem. Upon
reading the bill I smiled and kept a watch on it from a distance.
The new law, effective July 1, prohibits public bodies from meeting
anywhere that photographing, filming, recording, or otherwise
reproducing any portion of an open meeting is not allowed.
That may make several public bodies move their meetings from
courthouses to a more gun-friendly environment.

CHP RENEWALS
Starting July 1 you can renew your CHP through the mail. Just send
your notarized application, a photocopy of your current CHP, and the
fee and your application will be processed and your new CHP mailed to
you. You might want to check with your local Circuit Court Clerk's
office in case they want something else included - Fairfax is
notorious for that. REMEMBER: renew between 90 and 180 days before
expiration of your old permit so that your new permit will become
effective on the day your old one expires. If you renew when there
are less than 90 days left on your old CHP, then the new permit will
become effective whenever it is issued, possibly causing you to lose
weeks that you had previously paid for on your old permit.

CHP ISSUANCE
If the judge agrees, Circuit Court Clerks will now be able to issue
permits as long as there were no problems with the application or the
background check, etc. This should speed up getting permits from many
localities. Judges will be happy to shift the CHP issuance to the
Circuit Court Clerks. Clerks like the idea as they can serve the
public more efficiently.

-------------------------------------------
***************************************************************************

Thanks for your great info on my topic, I will print this and use this in the future. Just to clarify for others reading this blog, My son did not handle his gun while driving he was he was in a parking lot in his car with expired tags Saw the cops down the street then put his gun in the glovebox before he pulled out of the lot to go to work just in case he got pulled over and just his luck he did.
 

ODA 226

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
1,603
Location
Etzenricht, Germany
Thanks for your great info on my topic, I will print this and use this in the future. Just to clarify for others reading this blog, My son did not handle his gun while driving he was he was in a parking lot in his car with expired tags Saw the cops down the street then put his gun in the glovebox before he pulled out of the lot to go to work just in case he got pulled over and just his luck he did.

So when and EXACTLY WHERE in VA. Beach did this incident occur?
 

palerider116

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
572
Location
Unknown
There are some missing factors in this account. I'd prefer to hear all the facts before I condemn one side or the other.

Erring on the side of not making the arrest on a questionably worded code is always the best thing. This code section was inserted to broaden (reclaim) a lost right. That must also be considered when reading this code section. Its a step in the right direction, but it still has quite a ways to go.

Considering the dictionary definition for secure(d) includes a verb entry meaning fasten or lock, it could be construed to mean that the weapon is secured in a closed container, or locked away in a closed container.

Yep, rather err on the side of not charging someone.
 

palerider116

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
572
Location
Unknown
+1 Isn't there a rule of statutory construction that ambiguity is resolved in favor of the defendant as an act of grace by the state?

I honestly don't know. I hold fast to the belief that its far better than the guilty go free sometimes than an innocent person be locked up.

Just the facts, ma'am. (SIR to Citizen)

When you have to speculate what the code means instead of having a firm understanding of what the code states, you've ceased the LE business and gone into Opinion Enforcement.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP I honestly don't know. I hold fast to the belief that its far better than the guilty go free sometimes than an innocent person be locked up.

+1 You're in good company. From Wiki:

Rule of Lenity In construing an ambiguous criminal statute, the court should resolve the ambiguity in favor of the defendant. See McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350 (1987); See, e.g., Muscarello v. U.S., 524 U.S. 125 (1998) (declining to apply the rule of lenity); Evans v. U.S., 504 U.S. 255 (1992) (Thomas, J., dissenting); Scarborough v. U.S., 431 U.S. 563 (1977) (Stewart, J., dissenting); See United States v. Santos (2008).
 

palerider116

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
572
Location
Unknown
I view it like this: a person is innocent until proven guilty. However, the officer making the arrest should know whether or not the person is TRULY guilty before getting that warrant. "I think he did it" or "He could have done it" is horse hockey. There must be EVIDENCE to support PROBABLE CAUSE.

Proving guilt is one thing in court. Swearing out a warrant just because he MAY be guilty, that doesn't fly.

When in doubt, don't make the arrest. If its between two people, advise warrants. I want evidence. I don't want "maybe's".
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla

palerider116

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
572
Location
Unknown
Some people are already a disgrace as a human being, let alone give them a title or some other official capacity. When someone wraps their illegal activities in the legitimacy of their office, the good in the profession suffer, and those abused likewise.

Its called a justice system, not a vengeance system.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Special Need?

VA Code 18.2-308 Section 10:

"Any person who may lawfully possess a firearm and is carrying a handgun while in a personal, private motor vehicle or vessel and such handgun is secured in a container or compartment in the vehicle or vessel."

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-308

The code section fails to clearly define what constitutes "secured". When this code came out, I expected that some case will eventually make its way up to the VA Supreme Court trying to decide what is secured.

As for the rest of this, why was the vehicle searched?

Maybe he had a 'Special Need' basis?

A novel idea for a vehicle, but what's to stop the cops from expanding 'Special Needs' doctrine to include motor vehicles?

Scary thought.
 

palerider116

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
572
Location
Unknown
Maybe he had a 'Special Need' basis?

A novel idea for a vehicle, but what's to stop the cops from expanding 'Special Needs' doctrine to include motor vehicles?

Scary thought.

There are too many unanswered variables to say for certain this was right or wrong. We have a third party post of an incomplete scenario. The driver may have given consent (HYPOTHETICAL). There could have been an odor of marijuana coming from the car (HYPOTHETICAL). The car could have just been inventoried for a tow (STRONG POSSIBILITY). The possibilities for speculation are endless. We are trying to finish a 500 piece jigsaw puzzle with 200 pieces missing.

The poster has opened a couple threads about possible lawsuits against VBPD, so this could be a reverse fishing expedition (POSSIBILITY).

Need to have some pieces filled in to make a better GUESS. :question:
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
As Palerider said....a lot of unknowns.

I'm always skeptical when a person with 12 posts has a revelation of some sort. That doesn't mean it didn't happen, just that I look at it harder.

Who his son is or what he was pulled for really isn't any of my business, so I'll leave it there until more comes out.

If what he said is correct about the gun in the glove compartment, the VB Cops do need some further education.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
There are too many unanswered variables to say for certain this was right or wrong. We have a third party post of an incomplete scenario. The driver may have given consent (HYPOTHETICAL). There could have been an odor of marijuana coming from the car (HYPOTHETICAL). The car could have just been inventoried for a tow (STRONG POSSIBILITY). The possibilities for speculation are endless. We are trying to finish a 500 piece jigsaw puzzle with 200 pieces missing.

The poster has opened a couple threads about possible lawsuits against VBPD, so this could be a reverse fishing expedition (POSSIBILITY).

Need to have some pieces filled in to make a better GUESS. :question:

Indeed there are unanswered questions, including those of exactly when and where this occurred - directed to the OP.

If it is legitimate/verifiable fine, but the avoidance of responding casts a cloud.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Indeed there are unanswered questions, including those of exactly when and where this occurred - directed to the OP.

If it is legitimate/verifiable fine, but the avoidance of responding casts a cloud.

No more murky than the result of your punctuation. :p

What have fines got to do with anything? What do deeds--in or out--have to do with questions?

Sheesh. Need a decoder ring to sort out your posts sometimes.

:)
 

palerider116

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Messages
572
Location
Unknown
No more murky than the result of your punctuation. :p

What have fines got to do with anything? What do deeds--in or out--have to do with questions?

Sheesh. Need a decoder ring to sort out your posts sometimes.

:)

At the fear of misunderstanding Grapeshot, I believe he meant "If it is legitimate/verifiable, fine, but the avoidance of responding casts a cloud."

Grapeshot, if I am wrong, I do apologize.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
At the fear of misunderstanding Grapeshot, I believe he meant "If it is legitimate/verifiable, fine, but the avoidance of responding casts a cloud."

Grapeshot, if I am wrong, I do apologize.

Oh, good lord! Don't apologize to him! :)

Its a long-running battle between us. We both look for spelling and punctuation errors in each other's posts, then razz the other about it. Usually, he wins. But, its fun. And, keeps us both home and out of trouble at night. Plays on words are fair game, too.

:D
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Indeed there are unanswered questions, including those of exactly when and where this occurred - directed to the OP.

If it is legitimate/verifiable fine, but the avoidance of responding casts a cloud.

For example,

Oh, my god! Damn that makes my head hurt. "The avoidance of responding"?

For crying out loud! Did you buy a bunch of participles on sale or something so that you had to write that sentence that way?

:D
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
No more murky than the result of your punctuation. :p

What have fines got to do with anything? What do deeds--in or out--have to do with questions?

Sheesh. Need a decoder ring to sort out your posts sometimes.

:)

Fine to Extra fine - a grading of precious metal coins - akin to some posts. :D

Same can be said for setting the diopter on ocular receptive devices. :lol:

Hint, Dewey, set ring to 413.
 
Top