Police in Norfolk, Va illegally arrest gun owner

[Deanimator]

They know full well what they did is illegal, but figured no one will seriously challenge their illegal ordinance.

When those responsible for upholding the law wilfully violate it, it destroys respect for the law.

 

[Bobarino]

A cop is not a lawyer or a judge. His duty is to arrest you if he feels you are violating the law.

this is not true. it matters not one whit what the officer feels. his duty is to arrest you if you ARE in violation of the law. that means that officers may have to enforce law they don't agree with or turn the other cheek from things they may feel should be a outlawedlaw but aren't.

the law is not about feelings. i hope this guy sues and wins and eats the badge of the arresting officer for breakfast.

Bobby

 

[Art Eatman]

Bobarino, relax. Substitute "believes" for "feels". The usage is just an example of why the saltshaker is needed when reading the typed word with an absence of facial expressions and body language to assist in understanding.

Folks here aren't heavy into precision in word usage.

Art

 

[Deanimator]

Bobarino, relax. Substitute "believes" for "feels".

Substitute "REASONABLY believes" for "believes".

Virginia's had preemption for what, nearly four years?

Belief that they could arrest someone iaw a city law which is CLEARLY in violation of state law, on a matter which has had CONSIDERABLE media exposure is OBVIOUSLY not reasonable. The police in this case knew or SHOULD HAVE KNOWN that their actions were in direct violation of state law.

Of course ignorance of the law is NOT an excuse... is it?

 

[Bobarino]

fair enough, Art. i'm of the opinion however, that is also the officer's duty to know what is and isn't a law or a violation thereof and if he/she is going to make an arrest, they better be dang sure that they are arresting someone for an actual arrestable offense. with so many thousands of laws on the books i realize that's its nigh impossible for the average officer to know every single one of them. That still doesn't excuse behavior like this though, in any way. subjecting an innocent person to this kind of treatment, due process or not, is completely unaccaptable and both the individual officer and the department should be held accountable.

Bobby

 

[Deanimator]

with so many thousands of laws on the books i realize that's its nigh impossible for the average officer to know every single one of them.

Then why should YOU be expected to know them, and be held criminally liable if you don't?

 

[Bobarino]

i agree with your point 100% but double standards for the .gov and civilians is nothing new. its cases like this one that may help us level the playing field by setting an example for police departments nationwide if the officer and agency are both heavily punished for violating a person's rights under color of law.

Bobby

 

[silliman89]

Virginia's had preemption for what, nearly four years?

Actually 20 years. Virginia code, section 15.2-915 was passed in 1987.

 

[det.pat]

these officers knowilingly and willfully commited a crime, as did they're supervisors and city government officials. they need to be punished for it.

this is not just a civil offense, it's criminal, and the appropriate penalty should be imposed.
pat

 

[Deanimator]

i agree with your point 100% but double standards for the .gov and civilians is nothing new. its cases like this one that may help us level the playing field by setting an example for police departments nationwide if the officer and agency are both heavily punished for violating a person's rights under color of law.

That's why I'm so adamant that the cops in this case be hammered mercilessly. The City may be cavalier with the taxpayers' money, but if cops who break the law lose everything they own a couple of times, Norfolk and cities like it may run out of people willing to commit crimes on their behalf. That's already happened here in Ohio. The local FOP has told Cleveland cops to NOT enforce state preempted gun laws in Cleveland. I guarantee you it isn't Frank Jackson they're trying to protect either. They know that any cop enforcing the assault weapon ban is doing the legal equivalent of flamenco dancing in a minefield. Nobody wants to fall on their sword for Mayor Jackson's benefit. I'm betting that when the sheriff yanks a few Norfolk cops out of their homes, there won't be a lot of volunteers to wifully violate Virginia statutes to their own extreme detriment.

 

[wjustinen]

Interesting exchange

Quote:
The city of Norfolk is well within it's power to enact a temporary no-gun ordinance at a public gathering.

Can they similarly enact a "temporary no-Blacks ordinance" at a public gathering?

I could be wrong - on this one I rather doubt it - but, while a city may have the authority to enact a "temporary no-Blacks ordinance;" the requirement that "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is an even more persuasive argument than State pre-emption, that there is no authority to enact a "temporary no-gun ordinance at a public gathering."

I've read a lot of nonsense about how this gentleman and the lad in Mobile with the AK were "stupid" and were doing a disservice to the RBKA.

Perhaps the most telling statement - and the wisest - posted on this subject is the one that said - in effect - "if you are afraid to exercise your rights, they don't exist."

 

[Deanimator]

"if you are afraid to exercise your rights, they don't exist."

That is 100% correct.

What the city, the cops and the defenders of both hope is that the public will be intimidated into abdicating its rights.

The way to defeat that strategy is to intimidate them right back, with pitiless and repeated litigation, and where possible criminal prosecution. They've declared war on lawful gun owners. The problem for them is that when your army gets scared and won't fight, you've lost the war. Let a few cops end up moving back home with mom and dad, or living in a refrigerator carton with their families, and the eagerness to commit crimes on behalf of the city of Norfolk will blow away like powder smoke. In the words of a famous Corsican artillerist, "Pour encourager les autres..."

 

[Mainsail]

i hope this guy sues and wins and eats the badge of the arresting officer for breakfast

That'll make a hella nasty exit wound.

 

[brickeyee]

":These are temporary only for the duration of that event. The city is well within its powers to temporary ban alcohol, guns, knives, or even glass containers for that event."

The exact cite has already been posted.
The city has NO POWER to regulate firearms. except as is defined in the state law.
Virginia is Dillon rule state. Subsidiary jurisdictions have only the powers explicitly delegated them, and NO others.

In Virginia it is only with the permission of the State that subsidiary jurisdictions can regulate ANYTHING.

The law is patently invalid since the City has NO power to regulate firearms in this way.
NONE.

Anyone enforcing the law is going to find themselves in trouble since the state's immunity does NOT extend without limit to the subsidiary jurisdictions.

 

[mobeewan]

Some people still believe that the state has given the local governments permission to enact gun laws in their charters. At one time yes. Local governments had permission to make laws including gun laws where the state is mum or gives permission. BUT, In 1987 Virginia code, section 15.2-915 (pre-emption) was passed by the Virginia legislature to stop city and county governments from passing gun laws. The state reserved the right to pass all gun laws from that point on. They could see a mess being created because when going from county to county and city to city. The laws were becoming different and would confuse the citizens. At that time however, they grandfathered all locals laws previously passed and let them remain on the books. The laws still differed in local jurisdictions. Then about 2 years ago they amended 15.2-915 to full pre-emption. All local gun laws at that time were invalidated, therefore making the laws throughout the state uniform. The only local laws that remained on the books or that can be passed locally are those in which the state has passed a law saying that the local government may pass a specific gun law. An example would be that in order for the locals to pass a limit on magazine capacity, the state to first pass a law saying that the locals could pass a law restricting magizine capacity. Then the local governments would then enact the law if they wanted to. There has to be specific permission for a specific law. There is no state law that allows any local government or their agents to put any temporary gun laws in effect for any reason, including special events. This includes the laws that Norfolk has passed for its events. 15.2-915 stands alone in forbiding local governments to pass gun laws unless allowed by state law. In order for Norfolk's laws to be valid the state would have to pass a law that said that local governments may ban the possesion of firearms at city sponsored events. Another example of local governments being able to pass a law is that the state concealed carry laws currently give permission to local governments to require an FBI background check when applying for a CHP if they want. This is not mandatory. However about 20% of localities in Virginia passed that law which was allowed 10 years ago even though the State Police said they do not need a separate FBI check becuase their NCIC is adequate. So as of 2 years ago when it comes to firearms, the state has to pass a law granting permission to creat specific laws first.

 

[Tim Burke]

VCDL has a new member today.

 

[cszy67]

Hello everyone, my name is Chet Szymecki. This is my statement:

I happen to be a person who feels strongly about the right to keep and bear arms. On some occasions, I gladly exercise that freedom by carrying a handgun in public places as it is the right of every law-abiding citizen to do.

My freedom was taken away from me by the Norfolk police for no valid reason. My family was mistreated and placed in peril by their actions. My efforts at a common sense discussion over the matter met with force and loud demands. This experience has shaken my long-held beliefs about the character of law-enforcement officers.

I plan to leave this matter with a neutral court to decide whether my freedoms under the federal Bill of Rights and the Virginia Constitution were violated.

My family and I wish to thank everyone for their kind words of support. If you would like for me to keep you updated regarding our progress feel free to contact me via the following:

[email protected]

Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) has been instrumental in helping to resolve our situation. They deserve my eternal gratitude.

Yours in truth and honor,

Chet Szymecki
Yorktown, VA

 

[tinygnat219]

Chet,

Fellow VCDL member here, TJ Parmele. Let us know if you need some financial assistance with your lawsuit. I can send a check or two your way to assist.

TJ

 

[Deanimator]

Hello everyone, my name is Chet Szymecki.

Chet, you have no idea of the depth of support for you.

Go after the officers who did this to you. Next time, others will think twice.

If you settle with the city make them fire the officers. Next time, nobody's going to fall on their sword for the city, especially if it throws them under the bus.

Good luck and take no prisoners.

 

[mobeewan]

Chet, I've also been a member of VCDL for a while now. Ditto on the financial help. I am fixing to send in my members dues and always send extra donations to VCDL and their PAC. I still got a little left if you need it. You have my support too and are in my prayers. I work nights at the shipyard in Newport News. I have missed city council meetings throughout the state when the councils were addressed about instances of police overstepping there bounds and using agressive tactics against law abiding gun owners. I have already notified my boss that I will be taking time off to attend the council meeting in Norfolk in which your case will be addressed. Good luck in your dealings against the council and No Po. Godspeed!

 

[Aguila Blanca]

And in so far as the cops not being able to cite the specific code section, they don't have to in fact the courts have held for years that the cops don't even have to tell you what you are being arrested for, it's not their job that is what you are officially arraigned for, accordingly its the job of the courts to read the charges before you.

I'm sure glad I don't live in your state.

In my state, the state prosecutors tell LEOs and other regulatory agents on at least an annual basis to be SURE to cite the infraction, and if we can't cite an infraction to shut up and move on. Without a citation to a specific law or ordinance, we have no basis on which to act. No, we may NOT look it up later. The rule is that the accused has a right to know what it is he is being accused of/arrested for.

I dunno ... that sorta sounds like not such a bad idea to me. Be realistic -- a traffic cop isn't allowed to write a parking ticket without citing a section of the laws or ordinances, but you think it's okay to handcuff someone and detain them for hours without the detaining officers even being able to elucidate what section of the law they claim to be enforcing? Gimme a break ...

 

[Aguila Blanca]

The actual case is that the man in question failed to comply with a lawful order by the police. In cases of public assembly the city and police can make requests of citizens that would normally violate their rights. These are temporary only for the duration of that event. The city is well within its powers to temporary ban alcohol, guns, knives, or even glass containers for that event. The police have the right to ask a citizen to comply AND arrest them if they do not.

You are overlooking the state preemption statute. The state apparently did not enact a law prohibiting municipalities from passing ordinances regarding bottles, chewing gum, loud music, tattoos, or any number of other things that a city might wish to temprarily ban during a festival event. However, the state DID enact a preemption law that says municipalities may not pass laws or ordinances regulating firearms.

Why is this so hard to understand? There can be no "super powers during events" when the claimed super powers are expressly forbidden by state law. Think of it in terms of the Constitution: The 1st Amendment says "The Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech ...". So if Congress enacts a law that abridges the freedom of speech, that law is invalid. The Virginia legislature enacted a law saying that "The cities shall make no law regulating the carry of firearms." Norfolk made a law regulating the carry of firearms.

I guess I'm simple-minded, but it looks pretty clear from where I sit.

 

[fletcher]

Welcome to THR, Chet. Let us know how this thing plays out.

 

[Baba Louie]

An enlightening read to date.

Welcome to THR Chet. Testing the waters can be painful and sometimes dangerous should they run too deep or swift... as I'm sure you know.

So now this will come before a magistrate, neh? Perhaps a jury as well? For both Criminal and Civil action?

Depending upon the Judge and depending upon the Jury, this could be a very interesting case to behold. In either case I'm sure that good Lawyers will not come cheaply even if they could defend it Pro Bono, and it may be that whichever side loses the initial round an appeal to higher authority might be filed and heard... which will, of course take more time and cost more money against local taxpayers money and legal expertise.

I think such an action for such a cause would certainly be worth a donation equal to a box or two of good ammunition. Is there any way to assure that such a donation to VCDL will be placed towards this legal action... (or will it mysteriously disappear to be used for administrative purposes?)

 

[Kentak]

Chet

Welcome to The High Road.

I would be extremely interested in hearing your first-hand account of exactly what happened--second-by-second, so to speak--from the moment of initial police contact until you were arrested.

Also, is this the first notable incident you've had while OC since the school board meeting thing a couple years ago?

K