Wednesday, October 2, 2013

More On Gloucester's One Dollar Gun Sales

Regulating Animal Control
Regulating Animal Control (Photo credit: Office of Governor Patrick)

Gloucester One Dollar Gun Sales from Chuck Thompson

Here is the entire issue that was a part of a public discussion last night before the Gloucester, Virginia board of supervisors.  As it turns out, Carl, (Chuck), Shipley decided to whine and cry about being able to buy his gun for one dollar from the county even though he only had 22 years of service in, and county code says you have to have 25 years of service in.  Well, first off, the 25 years of service is in violation of state codes.  Not that this is bad enough, but Animal Control does not qualify as law enforcement per Virginia code.  Now they are granted limited law enforcement capabilities by both state code and local ordinance, but are not technically considered law enforcement by either that we see.  See the above 59.1-148.3 state code.

 It appears Animal Control officers are excluded from section A which is the defining section for the rest of the code.  Carl's complaint was that he wanted to buy his gun for one dollar even though he does not have the right to from what we see in the state code.  Watch the video here as Brenda Garton now plays legal interpretation for state code in violation of the Dillon Rule.

We have gone over the state codes regarding law enforcement officers and animal control officers.  Animal Control at this time is not listed as law enforcement.  They have certain deputized duties of law enforcement, but are not listed as law enforcement at all.  Link to Animal Control officer status with the state.  Now it looks like in the future there will be a new breed that does meet the law enforcement section of state code, but that division has not yet been made law, even though it is on the books to become law.  This link will take you to where the state is looking at Animal Protection Police.  If and when that comes, then those are the ones who will meet law enforcement guidelines of the state.  (More invasions on privacy).

  So what we see in the video is county employees making assumptions in violation of the Dillon Rule regarding Carl Shipley being able to buy a gun for one dollar when he is not classified as law enforcement.   Where was Twitching Ted, (I'm not an attorney), Willymot, the court jester, county attorney on all of this?  Not a word came out of his mouth.  County employees just state Twitches opinion for him, and it does not look as though that opinion was correct.  But hey, when do we actually see these people trying to even consider following any laws anyway?  It's more fun to make them up as you go along.  Even the Sheriff was appalled at the county ordinances not meeting state guidelines.

Enhanced by Zemanta

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank You for taking the time to comment on this article. Please note, we moderate every comment before we allow it to post. Comments do not show up right away because of this.