WINCHESTER — A Winchester Circuit Court judge has issued injunctions temporarily blocking the city from enforcing portions of the gun ban it adopted last year.
The action stems from a lawsuit initiated on April 21, 2021, that seeks to overturn the ban entirely. The suit was filed against the city of Winchester and its police chief, John Piper, by Loren Wilkerson of Winchester and Brandon Angel of Kearneysville, West Virginia; Winchester business owners Mark Stickley of Runners Retreat and Shannon Nuckols of Mac Shack Express; retail store Stonewall Arms in Winchester; and advocacy organizations Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, U.S. Law Shield of Virginia and Virginia Citizens Defense League.
The four advocacy organizations were removed from the lawsuit in November by Winchester Circuit Court Judge William Warner Eldridge IV, but the other five plaintiffs were allowed to continue.
Following a hearing on May 25 and additional arguments on Aug. 4, Eldridge issued a written opinion on Tuesday stating Winchester’s ban on guns in public parks and any place city-permitted events are taking place “violate an individual’s rights” under the 2nd and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 13 of the Constitution of Virginia. Because of that, those sections of the city ordinance cannot be enforced until a final decision on the entire lawsuit is rendered at trial.
However, Eldridge declined to issue injunctions against two other parts of the gun ban that prohibit firearms in any building owned or used by the local government or its agencies. Those sections of the ban can continue to be enforced by the Winchester Police Department pending resolution of the lawsuit.
When asked to comment on the injunctions issued by Eldridge, City Attorney Melisa Michelsen issued a written statement: “The city has received Judge Eldridge’s ruling and is evaluating it. Once [City] Council has a full opportunity to digest and assess the court’s opinion, it will determine what, if any, action is appropriate.”
City Council met Tuesday night but did not discuss the gun ban or the lawsuit. Its next meeting is scheduled for Oct. 11.
On Wednesday, Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation issued a media release taking credit for obtaining the temporary injunctions, even though the two advocacy groups are no longer part of the lawsuit.
Gun Owners of America Senior Vice President Erich Pratt issued a statement that said, in part, “We appreciate Judge Eldridge’s move to enjoin much of this unconstitutional ordinance, and we are confident that we will succeed in fully dismantling this law at trial.”
On Feb. 9, 2021, City Council adopted an ordinance banning guns and ammunition in public parks and on city government-owned property, as well as at public events that were issued permits by Rouss City Hall, including the Shenandoah Apple Blossom Festival. Violations constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail and a fine of $2,500.
In June, council considered amending the ban to eliminate the restriction on firearms and bullets at city-permitted events and allow city employees to keep guns and/or ammunition inside locked personal vehicles that are parked on city property. However, the firm that is contracted to provide legal advice to the city, Litten and Sipe of Harrisonburg, advised council last month to hold off on any changes pending the outcome of the lawsuit.
No trial has been scheduled, but the next hearing in the case is scheduled for Aug. 4 in Winchester Circuit Court.
(11) comments
The last sentence in the article is wrong. No date for further hearings has yet been set.
The Second Amendment has been incorrectly interpreted by the Supreme Court as an individual right ( in 2008: DC vs Heller). It should apply ONLY to a "well regulated militia" and not to each and everyone anywhere to carry any kind of weapon. Guns are death. But, we want to live!
Then go bury your head in the sand.
[rolleyes] - Stop watching the know-nothing clowns on CNN/MSNBC, your fear-mongering assertion defies all of American history. The 2nd amendment is an individual right just as are the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th; the 10th speaks to state rights (federalism). "Well regulated" has absolutely zero to do with federal agency oversight as federal agencies didn't exist. In the language of the day, it merely means disciplined and ready to call into action for the community of able bodied citizens. It does not protect "any kind of weapon" but does protect those arms that could be employed by individuals in defense of person, community, and state. In original intent, the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government. SCOTUS changed that with its Incorporation Doctrine following the American Civil War.
Also Virginia's Bill of Rights upon which the US BoR is based states:
Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power
That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
Guns are "Life," and the evidence abounds. Americans established their independence with guns and have maintained their freedom from oppression with guns ever since. There is a better case for abolishing the U.S. Army than the individual's right to keep and bear arms. Get over it, as they like to say. [beam]
If your fingers cannot control your copy and paste, (same comment three times?) how can you control a gun?
[rolleyes] - Stop watching the know-nothing heads on CNN/MSNBC, your fear-mongering assertion defies all of American history. The 2nd amendment is an individual right just as are the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th; the 10th speaks to state rights (federalism). "Well regulated" has absolutely zero to do with regulatory oversight as regulatory agencies didn't exist. In the language of the day, it merely means disciplined and ready to call into action for the community of able bodied citizens. It does not protect "any kind of weapon" but does protect those arms that could be employed by individuals in defense of person, community, and state. In original intent, the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government. SCOTUS changed that with its Doctrine of Incorporation following the American Civil War.
Also Virginia's Bill of Rights upon which the US BoR is based states:
Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power
That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
Guns are "Life," and the evidence abounds. Americans established their independence with guns and have maintained their freedom from oppression with guns ever since. There is a better case for abolishing the U.S. Army than the individual's right to keep and bear arms. Get over it, as they like to say. [beam]
[lol][lol][lol] Ignorance is bliss, ain't it? The Bill of Rights are ALL for the individual.
Well, since someone is slacking here, I guess it's up to me to apply some double standards! To quote "You don't even live here!" thus negating any opinion you might have. [wink][lol]
The Second Amendment has been incorrectly interpreted by the Supreme Court in 2008 in D.C v. Heller as an individual, rather than a collective right. I think it is meant to mean that ONLY a “well regulated militia” has the right to “keep and bear arms”, NOT every and any individual person everywhere! May SCOTUS correct their 2008 error and interpret the 2nd A literally - as a collective right only for well regulated militia like the police force and the National Guard. Guns are death. We want to LIVE!
[rolleyes] - Stop watching the know-nothing clowns on CNN/MSNBC, your fear-mongering assertion defies all of American history. The 2nd amendment is an individual right just as are the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th; the 10th speaks to state rights (federalism). "Well regulated" has absolutely zero to do with federal agency oversight as federal agencies didn't exist. In the language of the day, it merely means disciplined and ready to call into action for the community of able bodied citizens. It does not protect "any kind of weapon" but does protect those arms that could be employed by individuals in defense of person, community, and state. In original intent, the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government. SCOTUS changed that with its Incorporation Doctrine following the American Civil War.
Also Virginia's Bill of Rights upon which the US BoR is based states:
Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power
That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
Guns are "Life," and the evidence abounds. Americans established their independence with guns and have maintained their freedom from oppression with guns ever since. There is a better case for abolishing the U.S. Army than the individual's right to keep and bear arms. Get over it, as they like to say. [beam]
As usual, your interpretation is wrong, as proven by those well more schooled in law than you are.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Comments are reviewed by moderators so they may not immediately appear. We appreciate your patience.