"Bob La Londe" wrote in message
...
"David H. Lipman" wrote in message
news:hCM2f.31630$q81.2333@trnddc06...
From: "Dom" dom@invalid
| I do believe the more specific area would take precedence. Municipalty
over
| county over state over federal.
|
No. State law always over-rules county and local jurisdictions.
I don't know if that is always the case, but in general state law will
often allow for specific regulation by the local municipality. For
instance there are state madated building codes, but the county or city
may have additional regulations.
The state does have the option to make a law that is blanket for the
state. Often though it allows for local variations such as in building
codes.
Also, a states constitution may have an affect on who has ultimate authority
over some issues.
I have to add, there are some examples of this that seem to imply that local
jurisdictions seem to have precedence. For instance in California some
municipalities have much more restrictive firearms laws than the state of
California. For instances contrary to popular belief Ca has an open carry
law. However it allows municipalities to prohibit open carry. In those
case you can only carry if you get a concealed carry permit from your
county. If I get the specifics wrong forgive me. I try to avoid going to
California. In addition In the LA area there are even much more restrictive
firearms ordinances. In my understanding they don't trump state law, but
are allowed by state statute to have further restrictions in addition to
those drawn out by the state statute. At first glance it appears that the
local ordinances take precedence over state statute. Situations like this
make it very difficult to determine who has the ultimate authority.
I'm certainly not trying to start a gun thread here. Just happens to be an
area where I have paid a little more attention whenever it has come to
public attention.
--
Bob La Londe
Cheapskate's Ways to Do Fishing Stuff
(The Frugal Fisherman)
Through the Month of October 2005
http://www.YumaBassMan.com