LEO's who claim ignorance of the law -

[SANDCREEK]

imported post

May I wade in - from Colorado ? Our situationin CO is essentially the same as in VA. This circular debate about whether the glass is " half - full", or "half - empty" is making me dizzy. Could we reach "outside the box" and re-visit the Virginia Constitution ( Bill of Rights/ section 13 , I believe it is). The RKBA is the "tipster" here - I think - as to whether the glass is half-full, or half-empty.You don't have to be a lawyer to grasp the concept thatcriminal statutes define what is "criminal" conduct, and prescribe penalties for such conduct. Coming at this from the opposite direction - what may I ask LEO 229 is the "penalty" prescribed for open carry of a holstered side-arm outside of restricted locations ? Why is there NO PENALTY......because OC is not a crime. If it is NOT A CRIME by definition it is lawful.Since US & state constitutions reserve power TO THE PEOPLE , the people do not require "ALLOWANCEs" from their elected representatives in the legislatures. Conduct that is lawful , yet injures another person, or obstructs the free excercise of another person's right comes under common (civil) law. I hope my 2 centavos helps resolve this debate.

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

You keep getting stuck on that one line..... You have failed to identify the purpose of the line.... It isthe criteria to charge someone for concealing the listed items. It does not mean the opposite is expressly legal to do.

You really are simply trying to be obnoxious. The one line I am "stuck on" is the criteria for lawfully carrying a weapon in plain open view, a/k/a as OPEN CARRY.

For God's sake, read the title of the code...."PERSONAL PROTECTION" and "CARRYING CONCEALED WEAPONS" and "WHEN LAWFUL TO CARRY."

It's lawful to carry a weapon for personal protection when...

1) it is not concealed

--or--

2) when you have a permit to conceal the weapon.

You can keep kicking this dead horse all you want to, but the fact of the matter is that Virginia code section § 18.2-308 clearly outlines lawful open carry. And earier in this thread YOU said no Virginia state code section does this.

§ 18.2-308. Personal protection; carrying concealed weapons; when lawful to carry.

A. If any person carries about his person, hidden from common observation, (i) any pistol, revolver, or other weapon designed or intended to propel a missile of any kind by action of an explosion of any combustible material; (ii) any dirk, bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, machete, razor, slingshot, spring stick, metal knucks, or blackjack; (iii) any flailing instrument consisting of two or more rigid parts connected in such a manner as to allow them to swing freely, which may be known as a nun chahka, nun chuck, nunchaku, shuriken, or fighting chain; (iv) any disc, of whatever configuration, having at least two points or pointed blades which is designed to be thrown or propelled and which may be known as a throwing star or oriental dart; or (v) any weapon of like kind as those enumerated in this subsection, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A second violation of this section or a conviction under this section subsequent to any conviction under any substantially similar ordinance of any county, city, or town shall be punishable as a Class 6 felony, and a third or subsequent such violation shall be punishable as a Class 5 felony. For the purpose of this section, a weapon shall be deemed to be hidden from common observation when it is observable but is of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature.............

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

Sheriff wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

You keep getting stuck on that one line..... You have failed to identify the purpose of the line.... It isthe criteria to charge someone for concealing the listed items. It does not mean the opposite is expressly legal to do.

You really are simply trying to be obnoxious. The one line I am "stuck on" is the criteria for lawfully carrying a weapon in plain open view, a/k/a as OPEN CARRY.

For God's sake, read the title of the code...."PERSONAL PROTECTION" and "CARRYING CONCEALED WEAPONS" and "WHEN LAWFUL TO CARRY."

It's lawful to carry a weapon for personal protection when...

1) it is not concealed

--or--

2) when you have a permit to conceal the weapon.

You can keep kicking this dead horse all you want to, but the fact of the matter is that Virginia code section § 18.2-308 clearly outlines lawful open carry. And earier in this thread YOU said no Virginia state code section does this.

§ 18.2-308. Personal protection; carrying concealed weapons; when lawful to carry.

A. If any person carries about his person, hidden from common observation, (i) any pistol, revolver, or other weapon designed or intended to propel a missile of any kind by action of an explosion of any combustible material; (ii) any dirk, bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, machete, razor, slingshot, spring stick, metal knucks, or blackjack; (iii) any flailing instrument consisting of two or more rigid parts connected in such a manner as to allow them to swing freely, which may be known as a nun chahka, nun chuck, nunchaku, shuriken, or fighting chain; (iv) any disc, of whatever configuration, having at least two points or pointed blades which is designed to be thrown or propelled and which may be known as a throwing star or oriental dart; or (v) any weapon of like kind as those enumerated in this subsection, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A second violation of this section or a conviction under this section subsequent to any conviction under any substantially similar ordinance of any county, city, or town shall be punishable as a Class 6 felony, and a third or subsequent such violation shall be punishable as a Class 5 felony. For the purpose of this section, a weapon shall be deemed to be hidden from common observation when it is observable but is of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature.............

Your kidding, right??? :shock:

Where in the "F" do you see the word "and" ????

Give it up man... You lost a long time ago. I appreciate your input but it is exactly what the people on here complain about. LEOs viewing the code to work in their favor so they can exploit it and harass people.

You have only done it in the reverse.. as a former LEO.. of almost 30 years...

To properly reword the line it would read as follows.....

when lawful to carry carrying concealed weapons [for] Personal protection

There is no AND in there anywhere!! :banghead:

I hope you were much better at counting spoons.... reading code sections is obviously not your cup of tea!

I think we are about done here... It would sicken me to see you try to fix your last post. Let's just agree to disagree and move along... nothing more to see here...

 

[Ohio Patriot]

imported post

I still say you two are (more or less) saying the same thing.

Back to the topic at hand!

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Where in the "F" do you see the word "and" ????

Yellow card. F-bomb. Time to move along, nothing new here.

Do not feed the troll.

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Where in the "F" do you see the word "and" ????

There is no AND in there anywhere!! :banghead:

It would sicken me to see you try to fix your last post.

I don't need to edit my post. I don't even need to lose control and curse to make my point. Once again I must slam dunk you, read closely.

§ 18.2-308. Personal protection; carrying concealed weapons; when lawful to carry. means § 18.2-308. Personal protection, and carrying concealed weapons, andwhen lawful to carry.

source -- From Wikipedia:

In English, the semicolon has two purposes:

1. binding two sentences more closely than if separated by a full-stop period. It replaces conjunctions, such as and or but.

LEO229, please apologize to me now. This entire discussionis now about as goofy as your trying to tie in KKK and The Keystone Kops to the VCDL. If you don't know the English language, don't try and debate it please.

 

[imperialism2024]

imported post

:?

 

[Gunslinger]

imported post

None of the states "permit" open carry. Fact. Most of them don't prohibit it. Seems simple when you look at it like that. None of the states "permit" me to drive a loud Corvette. Wait, the analogy is breaking down...:banghead:

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

Sheriff wrote:

I don't need to edit my post. I don't even need to lose control and curse to make my point. Once again I must slam dunk you, read closely.

§ 18.2-308. Personal protection; carrying concealed weapons; when lawful to carry. means § 18.2-308. Personal protection, and carrying concealed weapons, andwhen lawful to carry.

source -- From Wikipedia:

In English, the semicolon has two purposes:

1. binding two sentences more closely than if separated by a full-stop period. It replaces conjunctions, such as and or but.

....Snipped re-hash

You got nothing left but to remark ona post that was added to, an alleged curse, and chat from another thread.These arethetactics you used in the past. When you are losing... you startslinging some mud at the other guy. Make the other guy look dirty so you will appear clean and look better. Give me a break! :lol:

Sir.... you have just proven my point beyond any doubt!In your own words... with the exception of that little comma YOU added to break it up to read the way you wanted it to.It has the same meaning as the way I reformatted it.

This code is completely.... about concealed carry! It has nothing to do with open carry. The entire code is written and talks about.... concealed weapons!

Dude... you are absolutely killing me here. I do not expect you to stop. As you have done in the past... you will dwell on this and continue to post and repost over the next couple of days. It is killing you right now to post! I know you!!

No apology needed. It would really be meaningless.

I think I said we should just agree to disagree last time...... Please... goand enjoy the rest of your evening.

I hope we can still be friends.:lol:

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

I hope we can still be friends.:lol:

You said in Private Message that our being friendsis not gonna happen when I suggested we remain friends.You blamed me for your losinga position as moderator here. Make your mind up please.

You exact words were, "... you took it upon yourself to continue to have my position terminated. Friends? I am going to have to pass. As they say... with friends like you... who needs enemies."

So now, officially, and for the last time -- do you want to be friends or not? Please answer here and stay out of my Private Message box.

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

Gunslinger wrote:

None of the states "permit" open carry. Fact. Most of them don't prohibit it.

Based on my recollection, I would have to disagree somewhat. Many many years ago, Virginia code section §18.2-308 was all about legally carrying a weapon in plain viewfor personalprotection. It prohibited a person carrying said weapon in a concealed fashion. Over the years all the extra ink about "concealed weapons" and "permits" has been added to it rather than creating a seperate code section.

As evidenced by LEO229. people nowadaysthink the code section is strictly about "concealed carry" and "permits". :shock:

 

[timf343]

imported post

Ohio Patriot wrote:

229:

Agreed, but I believe it's better than doing nothing at all. At the very least, it will give the police chief or sheriff pause. And such a document can only help (not hurt) the victim in court. But I agree it's not a perfect solution.

I agree that such a document CAN help you, but remember, anything you say to LEO can also be used against you. What if you are a suspect in an unrelated crime (obviously a case of mistaken identity), and the postmark from your envelope is dated the same day as the crime? Worthless evidence perhaps, but how do you know how a jury will feel about it?

I've been on this "dont talk to cops" kick lately, so forgive me if the above example sounds extreme. I do agree that the letter would be useful in many respects, but at the same time don't want to be oblivious to the fact that the contents of the letter CAN be used against you later.

Tim

 

[Gunslinger]

imported post

Sheriff wrote:

Gunslinger wrote:

None of the states "permit" open carry. Fact. Most of them don't prohibit it.

Based on my recollection, I would have to disagree somewhat. Many many years ago, Virginia code section §18.2-308 was all about legally carrying a weapon in plain viewfor personalprotection. It prohibited a person carrying said weapon in a concealed fashion. Over the years all the extra ink about "concealed weapons" and "permits" has been added to it rather than creating a seperate code section.

As evidenced by LEO229. people nowadaysthink the code section is strictly about "concealed carry" and "permits". :shock:

Must have been a while ago. Just checked and nothing about OC. When I lived in VA and had a CCW--2001-2005, I never bothered to look up OC because I knew there was no law prohibiting it and almost always carried concealed. But it (308) goes on and on now about CC and who doesn't get one, as well as who (retired cops, States Attornies, etc) doesn't need one.

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

The carrying of a weapon for personal protection used to be 18.1-269 I think. It forbid carrying of such weapon concealed. In other words, open carry. Then when the need to address concealed weapons and permits came along, it was all combined into 18.2-308. If you punch in 18.1-269 in the Virginia code search it will take you directly to 18.2-308.

Don't quote me on ay of the above, I am talking from recollection. And I can't find 18.1-269 anywhere right now.

 

[johnnyb]

imported post

typical LEO.

elementary level reading comprehesion would allow someone to read § 18.2-308. and understand what the ; means reguardless of weather the person reading it was previously aware of a semicolon's meaning.

ban leo 229 http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum65/13195.html

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

johnnyb wrote:

elementary level reading comprehesion would allow someone to read §18.2-308. and understand what the ; means....

You would think so, wouldn't you?

In Virginia code section§18.2-308 it means....

"PERSONAL PROTECTION" and "CARRYING CONCEALED WEAPONS" and "WHEN LAWFUL TO CARRY."

 

[imperialism2024]

imported post

Is there any hope of getting the thread back on track?

Or must y'all insist on harassing LEO 229 over every post he makes in the interest of proving that he's "wrong"? Members who were truly dedicated to this site would either quietly tolerate their vendettas against certain members, or would move the discussion to PMs if it's so important.

Maturity, people, maturity... :banghead:


Please do not reply to this post. Either address the OP, or just let the thread die.

 

[Ohio Patriot]

imported post

imperialism2024 wrote:

Is there any hope of getting the thread back on track?

Not sure... I have never witnessed so much baby-bickering in my life. :banghead:LEOs no doubt!



Back on track!

 

[Sheriff]

imported post

Ohio Patriot wrote:

Not sure... I have never witnessed so much baby-bickering in my life. :banghead:LEOs no doubt!



Back on track!

So it is your belief that only LEOs bicker? :question:

See how we got off topic yet again? :shock: