Showing posts with label Federal Laws. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Federal Laws. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Gloucester, Virginia Zoning For Horses: None By Federal Law




Now here is a very interesting case that was brought up before the Board of Supervisors and we just covered this issue in an earlier post tonight, but the issue involves zoning for horses in Gloucester County.  Well zoning only applies to county owned land.  Not to anyone with a farm, business, or personal use.  The county has no legal say whatsoever in this matter, yet, are trying to state that they do.  You have no obligation at any time to ask for permission to do anything here in the county or anywhere in the 48 states of the Union.  (We know there are 50 states, but you better look up some facts on who the Constitution actually applies to).  The claims made by Ted Wilmot simply are not true based on the information below.

Again, let's look at those laws:

"ENFORCEMENT OF CITY/COUNTY CODES PROHIBITED 
California Law prohibits Cities and Counties from enforcing City or County Codes and Ordinances upon property that is not OWNED by the City or County even if the property is within City limits.

California Penal Code: Chapter 5b CITATIONS FOR VIOLATIONS OF COUNTY, CITY, OR CITY AND COUNTY ORDINANCES Sections 853.1through 853.4 was repealed in 1967.

The Supreme Court ruled that Municipalities cannot exert any acts of ownership and control over property that is not OWNED by them, see Palazzolo v. Rhode Island 533 US 606, 150 L.Ed. 2d 592, 121 S.Ct. ___(2001) (no expiration date on the taking clause for City's illegal enforcement of its Codes on the man's private property and restricting the man's business), affirming both Lucas v South Carolina Coastal Council, 505 US 1003, 120 L.Ed. 2d 798 (1992).(butterfly activists and Code Enforcement cannot restrict development of the man's private swampland unless they lawfully acquire the land FIRST, surveying with binoculars constitutes a "takings"), and Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes, 526 US 687 (1999), 143 L.Ed. 2d 882 S.Ct.____ (1998).

In the Monterey case, the California private property owner was awarded $8 million for Code Enforcement's illegal trespass and restriction of his business, and another $1.45 million for the aggravation of a forced sale.

Federal Law also prohibits Cities and Counties from issuing citations against businesses, see Title 18 U.S.C.891-896, quoting Section 891 "An extortionate means is any means which involves the use, or an express or implicit threat of use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to the person, reputation, or property."

Black's Law Dictionary 5 th Edition (page 1140): Recaption. At Common Law, a retaking or taking back. 


Now even though California law is cited here, it is applicable throughout all 48 contiguous states of the union.  Ted Wilmot does not know the law?  Whomever brought the charges against these people should be sued to no end.  Each county employee involved should be sued as a private individual as well as the county in our opinion.  Again, the audacity of these folks is unreal.   Please note the amount the man sued for and won.  The county needs to be taken to task on this outrageous invasion of the people the county brought to court.  The massive invasion of their rights is unconscionable.

  Now what is truly sad is the fact that the people who are in court over this, their own attorney does not even know this nor tried to look it up.  What does that say about their own legal council?  You need to hire an attorney why?  Ever?  Good luck with that.

But as we like to state, none of this should ever be construed as legal advice.  You can only get legal advice from a Franchised Bar attorney which we have not bought into the Bar franchise nor are we even interested in doing so.  So for franchised legal advice, please see a franchised legal consultant known as an attorney.  We only discuss lawful concepts which everyone has a right to do as that right is inherent and unalienable.  No license required.  In fact, in the Commonwealth of Virginia, it's the people who make the laws, not the government.  If you question that, please see the Commonwealth Constitution.  

  Those codes that the legislature churns out is only the color of law.  If it were law, it would say it was law.  Instead, they are statutes, codes and or ordinances.  That is not law.  Those codes, ordinances and or statutes really do not apply to you.  They apply to a person.  Who is a person?  An actor who wears a mask.  

  Who are the true actors?  Government employees.  Most folks are wrongfully charged and do not even know it and get thrown in jail, prison, or charged with crimes they did not actually commit.  And you thought maybe something was wrong with the system?  Yes there is.



The Official State Office Known As Person 

The above document is free to download from our SlideShare site.  It explains who a person is.  We verified the definition of a person through the Oxford dictionary as well as the Catholic Dictionary.  An actor who wears a mask.  If it was meant to be against a man or a woman, the codes, statutes and or ordinances would say so.  They clearly never do.  You have to ask why.  Or just learn the real definition.  Have you been fooled by the legal system?

Coming soon.  How to disqualify any judge or prosecuting attorney.  The legal term?  Recuse them.

Sunday, November 2, 2014

Gloucester, VA Animal Control Ordinances vs State and Federal Laws and Codes

We have completed going through all of the Gloucester County, Virginia ordinances as they relate to and are covered under Animal Control.  What we have found are numerous violations in a number of local ordinances.

  Gloucester Animal Control Ordinance 3-18 is our biggest complaint, however, it is not our only complaint.  We have a real problem with Gloucester County officials just making up ordinances in violation of both state as well as federal codes, and or laws.

It is outrageous that county officials have gotten away with this for so long and it's time to put a stop to it all.   Here is what we found posted in a SlideShare container to keep the site compact but still very usable.



Gloucester, Virginia Animal Control Ordinances With Notes, 10 2014 from Chuck Thompson

The above is the complete Animal Control ordinances for Gloucester County as of November 2nd, 2014 as they currently stand.  We have highlighted areas we found to be illegal or highly questionable, in yellow.  Our notes follow the yellow highlighted sections with a salmon colored highlighting over the notes.  We point out that we can not find any corresponding state codes and argue to have these illegal codes removed from the books.

  A copy of the above has already been sent to the Board of Supervisors for this upcoming meeting to be held at the Colonial Courthouse in the Courthouse circle on Wednesday evening.  That meeting starts at 7:00 PM.

  Our biggest contention is the very highly illegal ordinance 3-18.  We have done all the research on this ordinance and it's proposed changes and have sent all the findings to the Board of Supervisors asking that no form of ordinance 3-18 show up on the books as it not only violates state codes, it also violates Federal Laws too.

Sec. 3-18. Animals in enclosed vehicles.

(a) It shall be unlawful to leave any animal in a vehicle without the
benefit of air conditioning when the outside temperature reaches
eighty (80) degrees Fahrenheit or greater.

(b) Any person who confines an animal in an unattended vehicle so as
to cause the animal to suffer from heat stress, shall be guilty of a
Class 1 misdemeanor. The animal control officer or other officer
shall have the authority to remove any animal found left in an
enclosed a vehicle that appears to be suffering from heat stress.
The animal shall be provided immediate veterinary care. The
animal owner or custodian shall be responsible for all expenses
incurred during the removal of the animal or its subsequent
treatment and impoundment.

(c) In the event that the person responsible for the violation cannot be
ascertained, the registered owner of the vehicle, as required by
Chapter 6 of Title 46.2 of the Code of Virginia, shall constitute in
evidence a prima facie presumption that such registered owner
was the person who committed the violation."

The above is the proposed new ordinance 3-18. It's original form was not legal and this new re write is even more illegal than it's predecessor.  We have posted those reasons on here many times already.  What we have not posted on here is Federal laws.  We have heard arguments being claimed that Animal Control isn't considering horse trailers as vehicles.  Well under the definition of federal law, horse trailers are considered vehicles.

CFR Title 41;  §102-34.35  

Motor vehicle means any vehicle, self propelled or drawn by mechanical power, designed and operated principally for highway transportation of property or passengers, but does not include a military design motor vehicle or vehicles not covered by this part (see §102-34.20).

That is the definition of a vehicle under federal law.  So it does include a horse trailer as a vehicle.  Animal Control's statements do not override federal law.

Further, we did research under title 49 of federal laws to see if the federal government requires air conditioning for transportation of people or animals.  There are no requirements and anyone who wants to question this, please, here are the links to check out for yourself.


Yes, we even looked up the transportation of migrant works as it is only reasonable that these laws would be more stringent.  Air conditioning is not required under federal laws.

  Local ordinances can not supersede state laws that can not supersede federal laws.  Animal Control ordinance 3-18 seeks to supersede both state and federal laws.  That is simply outrageous.

Today, Sunday November 2nd, 2014, we received a phone call from a friend who told us about a meeting of concerned animal owners in the county, the meeting of which was held at Anna's Pizza in the courthouse area.  Some of the people at this meeting are not going to be able to attend the Board of Supervisors meeting this coming Wednesday.


We have sent a copy of this petition to the Board of Supervisors and we recommend that everyone who is concerned about this and other illegal ordinances contact the Board as soon as possible before Wednesday Night's meeting.

BoS@gloucesterva.info is their email address.