Tazewell Board of Supervisors considers allowing firearms in parks

[jmelvin]

E-gad TFred perhaps you should have talked to the person I talked to. I don't think the intent of the sentence you quoted was to suggest that suddenly the county was a hero here. The article seemed to make clear that the county understands that state law is and has been the decider. If nothing else the person that made the statement may simply have the thought that now that the county has changed its regs and rules, someone doesn't even have to worry about being hassled over the unenforceable law. I don't think this is a county government that has any intention of fighting this and they're probably content that due to the state law being there, this is a fight they don't even have to take on.

 

[JamesCanby]

Ummmm....

In the article they quote one Mr. B.C. Fuller as saying: "I live right close to a shooting range at Triangle Park up there, and I hear it everyday" talking about firearms being discharged.

I just can't wrap my head around what must be going on inside the head of someone who would field a concern like this.

Isn't that a little like saying "I live near Reagan Airport and I hear airplanes every day?" What was his point?

 

[TFred]

E-gad TFred perhaps you should have talked to the person I talked to. I don't think the intent of the sentence you quoted was to suggest that suddenly the county was a hero here. The article seemed to make clear that the county understands that state law is and has been the decider. If nothing else the person that made the statement may simply have the thought that now that the county has changed its regs and rules, someone doesn't even have to worry about being hassled over the unenforceable law. I don't think this is a county government that has any intention of fighting this and they're probably content that due to the state law being there, this is a fight they don't even have to take on.

Don't read too much negative in my post. I am very happy with the outcome. I guess my point is that the Tazewell County government, probably like many local governments across the state, simply don't understand the true nature of the preemption law. While it is commendable that they had good intentions, what they did was quite literally just mandatory housekeeping, and considering the potential exposure to the liability of reimbursing court costs, was pretty much by definition a "no brainer".

TFred

 

[Grapeshot]

Most (all?) of the local elected officials in these more rural areas are working citizens whose full time employment is other than running the municipal government - they are honest, hardworking and seldom able to keep fully knowledgeable of all laws and interpretations. When they stray off center, they are generally quick to right the course when the deviation is pointed out to them.

All involved are to be commended.

 

[wylde007]

Most (all?) of the local elected officials in these more rural areas are working citizens whose full time employment is other than running the municipal government.

There's something to be said for that.

It is a consideration that our founders ALWAYS held for public office. Representatives and SERVANTS of the people were never intended to be career politicians.

 

[VApatriot]

“The point is this ordinance is unconstitutional,” Southern District board member Mike Hymes said. “So our rules up there were in violation of the Virginia state constitution.”

While I wouldn't totally agree that this was a "constitutional" issue, I think that this quote better shows that they understood that they were in violation and without authority in the matter.

 

[wylde007]

While I wouldn't totally agree that this was a "constitutional" issue, I think that this quote better shows that they understood that they were in violation and without authority in the matter.

I wonder how they would justify satisfaction of the "Constitutionality" issue by only allowing permitted carry in their parks.

Permitted carry being a violation of the Constitution in and of itself.

 

[peter nap]

“The point is this ordinance is unconstitutional,” Southern District board member Mike Hymes said. “So our rules up there were in violation of the Virginia state constitution.”

While I wouldn't totally agree that this was a "constitutional" issue, I think that this quote better shows that they understood that they were in violation and without authority in the matter.

Going back to Jmelvin's first contact, Board members thought it was unconstitutional. This was arguable though and after Jmelvin pointed out that Virginia law didn't allow it, it was no longer arguable so the constitutional issue was moot.

 

[TFred]

Going back to Jmelvin's first contact, Board members thought it was unconstitutional. This was arguable though and after Jmelvin pointed out that Virginia law didn't allow it, it was no longer arguable so the constitutional issue was moot.

That sums up what I was trying to say exactly!

TFred