So long CLEO sign off, Fairfax County, VA

[LittleLebowski]

New Sheriff elect Stacey Kincaid's views on firearms.


She supports universal background checks for purchasing firearms, as well as bans on assault weapons and high capacity magazines

http://staceykincaid.com/news/#sthash.IKo6Kj6A.dpuf


Happily, she is focused like a laser on diversity (http://staceykincaid.com/issues/).

[cclaxton]

The Sheriff has little influence in Fairfax County except within the judicial system.
Fairfax County Police Chief and Fairfax County Board have the real power to make those decisions.
The Sheriff's responsibilities are primarily Court Security, Fairfax Detention Facilities, Transportation of Suspects and those convicted, Federal and Interstate Coordination, and delivery of warrants/process.

CC

[LittleLebowski]

The Sheriff has little influence in Fairfax County except within the judicial system.
Fairfax County Police Chief and Fairfax County Board have the real power to make those decisions.
The Sheriff's responsibilities are primarily Court Security, Fairfax Detention Facilities, Transportation of Suspects and those convicted, Federal and Interstate Coordination, and delivery of warrants/process.

CC

I'll make it more clear. See the title and the word "CLEO?" With the BATF's recent proposal to get rid of the gun trust route to owning NFA weapons (no gun trust weapon has ever been used in a crime), the only other way to own NFA weapons/suppressors (after said ban on gun trusts is in effect) is through your local CLEO/Chief Law Enforcement Officer or......for Fairfax County residents, the Sheriff of Fairfax.

I fully understand VA state laws on preemption which is why I entitled this thread with the one firearms related bit that this new Sheriff can change at the local level.

[JV_]

for Fairfax County residents, the Sheriff of Fairfax.What about Fairfax County Police Department? Does their chief qualify for signing off?

[LittleLebowski]

What about Fairfax County Police Department? Does their chief qualify for signing off?

Not sure, checking.

[jc000]

I had a long-winded NRA/Cuccinelli rant I was going to post after the election but decided not to. I can say that I'm very glad to be out of FFXC and over in PWC, though I am quite aware that things are sliding here as well.

I don't know what to say, to be perfectly honest it seems we are facing an inevitably losing battle. The shifting demographics are proving that this type of anti-constitutional/P.C. political viewpoint resonates with more Americans than it doesn't.

I've lived in this region my entire life and have seen the change happen over time. Other than complain on forums and in the comments sections of digital news sites there doesn't appear to be much to do about it.

[LittleLebowski]

What about Fairfax County Police Department? Does their chief qualify for signing off?

From a gun forum but still researching....


The Fairfax County Police Chief does not sign. The Sheriff Office has the responsibility for ATF forms in the county.

[JV_]

I wonder if this doc, just a few months old, will get updated:
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/sheriff/atf-forms-application-instructions.pdf

[joshs]

What about Fairfax County Police Department? Does their chief qualify for signing off?

The federal regulation requiring "CLEO" sign offs would allow sheriffs, chiefs, commonwealth attorneys, the state police, or any other individual approved by the US AG to sign off, but most of these entities usually choose to leave it to either the sheriff or chief. This may be due to a real or perceived limitation of authority under state law, lack of resources, or opposition to ownership of all or some NFA firearms.

My understanding is that currently, sign offs are all done by the Fairfax Sheriff, but there is nothing in the law limiting the other qualified "CLEOs" from signing.

[cclaxton]

I had a long-winded NRA/Cuccinelli rant I was going to post after the election but decided not to. I can say that I'm very glad to be out of FFXC and over in PWC, though I am quite aware that things are sliding here as well.

I don't know what to say, to be perfectly honest it seems we are facing an inevitably losing battle. The shifting demographics are proving that this type of anti-constitutional/P.C. political viewpoint resonates with more Americans than it doesn't.

I've lived in this region my entire life and have seen the change happen over time. Other than complain on forums and in the comments sections of digital news sites there doesn't appear to be much to do about it.

It doesn't have to be a losing battle. Democrats, moderates, Independents, and even liberals, are not a monolithic anti-gun voting block. Politically it is smart to cultivate a better understanding of gun ownership for self-defense and defense of others among those constituencies. We have to stop using gun-rights to try to convert people to a Republican/Tea-Party/Libertarian votes and instead convert people to supporting gun ownership as a matter of party-neutral good politics. It is a mistake to think that converting others doesn't matter....it DOES MATTER, as ELECTIONS MATTER. Most people are not single-issue voters, so while they might support gun-rights, they may not support bans on abortion or dismantling Obamacare or radical cuts in government. It is a lot harder to convince an individual to switch parties than it is to convince them on a single issue, such as gun rights.

It is all about PUBLIC RELATIONS: good messaging, education, exposure and avoiding a confrontational and unreasonable tone.

The more INDIVIDUALS in those constituencies that can become advocates for gun ownership, the more we can minimize the political influence of groups opposed to gun rights, and the more we can make changes to gun laws in our favor.

Being SMART in politics and public relations means winning and winning on gun rights means getting as many voters on our side regardless their party or other political views.

CC

[JV_]

Democrats, moderates, Independents, and even liberals, are not a monolithic anti-gun voting block.

No, they're not 100% (monolithic) for gun control, very few things are absolute. Just like republicans aren't all pro-gun. But (IMO) the generalizations that democrats and liberals are anti-gun is well earned.

Democrats and liberals in congress, that are pro gun, are on the endangered species list. Begich, Baucus, Pryor, and Heitkamp don't hold views that are in line with their party. What do they have in common? 3 of those 4 are up for election next year.

[LittleLebowski]

It doesn't have to be a losing battle. Democrats, moderates, Independents, and even liberals, are not a monolithic anti-gun voting block. Politically it is smart to cultivate a better understanding of gun ownership for self-defense and defense of others among those constituencies. We have to stop using gun-rights to try to convert people to a Republican/Tea-Party/Libertarian votes and instead convert people to supporting gun ownership as a matter of party-neutral good politics. It is a mistake to think that converting others doesn't matter....it DOES MATTER, as ELECTIONS MATTER. Most people are not single-issue voters, so while they might support gun-rights, they may not support bans on abortion or dismantling Obamacare or radical cuts in government. It is a lot harder to convince an individual to switch parties than it is to convince them on a single issue, such as gun rights.

It is all about PUBLIC RELATIONS: good messaging, education, exposure and avoiding a confrontational and unreasonable tone.

The more INDIVIDUALS in those constituencies that can become advocates for gun ownership, the more we can minimize the political influence of groups opposed to gun rights, and the more we can make changes to gun laws in our favor.

Being SMART in politics and public relations means winning and winning on gun rights means getting as many voters on our side regardless their party or other political views.

CC

Perhaps you should work with the Democrats with their stance on gun rights then so it isn't such a polarizing, one party issue.

[5pins]

The federal regulation requiring "CLEO" sign offs would allow sheriffs, chiefs, commonwealth attorneys, the state police, or any other individual approved by the US AG to sign off, but most of these entities usually choose to leave it to either the sheriff or chief. This may be due to a real or perceived limitation of authority under state law, lack of resources, or opposition to ownership of all or some NFA firearms.

My understanding is that currently, sign offs are all done by the Fairfax Sheriff, but there is nothing in the law limiting the other qualified "CLEOs" from signing.

When I lived in Spokane a dealer there was getting a judge to sign off because the sheriff at that time would not.

[Kyle Reese]

Terry McAwful and his ilk won't be doing gun owners or rights any favors in Virginia. There's no way to polish that turd.

[jc000]

Terry McAwful and his ilk won't be doing gun owners or rights any favors in Virginia. There's no way to polish that turd.

Which leads me to question the lackluster role that Fairfax HQ'd NRA played in the election. But I digress...

[LittleLebowski]

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/state-legislation/2013/11/virginia-governor-elect-appoints-gun-control-operative-to-transition-team.aspx

Only a couple of weeks after narrowly winning his bid for Governor of Virginia, NRA-PVF “F” rated candidate Terry McAuliffe appointed the Virginia State Director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Lori Haas, to his 54-member “bipartisan” transition team.

CSGV advocates measures such as criminalizing the private transfer of firearms between family and friends, banning commonly owned semi-automatic firearms and ammunition magazines, imposing a deeply flawed microstamping system, revoking concealed carry laws and repealing self-defense laws.

Despite claiming support for the Second Amendment, Haas’s appointment to this position to help assemble his Administration sends a very clear message to gun owners and sportsmen in Virginia that their rights are already under attack in Richmond.

[HCM]

there is nothing in the law limiting the other qualified "CLEOs" from signing.

This is correct. There was a District Court Judge here in San Antonio, TX who would sign off but he is now retired. Rumor around the courthouse is the Judge once received a telephone call from ATF inquiring as to why he had signed a Form 4. The Judge responded: “son if I can sentence a man to death, I sure as hell can sign a Form 4. Don’t bother me again.”

[cclaxton]

Terry McAwful and his ilk won't be doing gun owners or rights any favors in Virginia. There's no way to polish that turd.

Politicians usually follow the majority view of the electorate to get elected, turd or not. Most constituencies want politicians who represent the majority view, not dictate their views to the electorate. If you change the electorate's view on a given issue, most smart politicians will follow.
CC

[ubervic]

It doesn't have to be a losing battle. Democrats, moderates, Independents, and even liberals, are not a monolithic anti-gun voting block. Politically it is smart to cultivate a better understanding of gun ownership for self-defense and defense of others among those constituencies. We have to stop using gun-rights to try to convert people to a Republican/Tea-Party/Libertarian votes and instead convert people to supporting gun ownership as a matter of party-neutral good politics. It is a mistake to think that converting others doesn't matter....it DOES MATTER, as ELECTIONS MATTER. Most people are not single-issue voters, so while they might support gun-rights, they may not support bans on abortion or dismantling Obamacare or radical cuts in government. It is a lot harder to convince an individual to switch parties than it is to convince them on a single issue, such as gun rights.

It is all about PUBLIC RELATIONS: good messaging, education, exposure and avoiding a confrontational and unreasonable tone.

The more INDIVIDUALS in those constituencies that can become advocates for gun ownership, the more we can minimize the political influence of groups opposed to gun rights, and the more we can make changes to gun laws in our favor.

Being SMART in politics and public relations means winning and winning on gun rights means getting as many voters on our side regardless their party or other political views.

CC

Thank you for articulating my view very well.

I do not conform to any particular party's 'platform.' I rely my own intellectual curiosity and active access to a broad range of information, rather than party politics, per se, to guide my opinions and my voting behavior.

And when it comes to firearms in particular, I talk about my decades of experience in the shooting sports, and I invite family, friends, coworkers to the range every chance I get. I consider it my job to demonstrate safe, responsible, trained firearms handling and ownership to my personal contacts. Some take me up on my invitation, and those who do are universally excited and glad that they did so when talking about it after the fact.