Is it illegal to use your automobile horn in the Commonwealth of Virginia?
112041
legal to use. Illegal to honk.
218416
I don't know about federal, but it's definitely against state laws, the D.O.T. can tell if your running it in on road vehicle , because of the red dye they put in it, to detect if someone is using it illegally.
830886
Almost never.  I have owned cars that I never honked the horn.  The only reason would be to alert someone of impending disaster who has not already noticed it.
1099065
I don't think they are illegal. They probably wouln't sell them if there if they were illegal. I know in Minnesota is is illegal to drive them on public roadways, and on state trails. There are designated area for ATV and recreational vehicles. On private land, they would not be illegal if used properly.
703620
What was the offense?\n\nTitle 46.2 - MOTOR VEHICLES, Code of Virginia
580031
Well, they are breaking the law by disturbing the peace. But the police will not do anything. So why would you be arrested for causing minor damage to their cars?   If you were arrested, you could plead  insanity due to their  driving you nuts with their loud music, violating your privacy. That way, you would be not guilty by reason of insanity, and guess what?\nnothing they can do about the damage you done, because they drove you to do it in the first place.\nSince those loud idiots refuse to turn down the volume, they deserve all the damage anyone can do to their cars.
1055604
You want dumb laws? \n\nI got yer dumb laws right here.\n\nIn nebraska:\n       1. If a child burps during church, his parent may  be arrested.\n\n        2. It is Illegal to go whale fishing.\n\n       3. It is illegal for bar owners to sell beer unless they are simultaneously brewing a kettle of soup.
535712
Sure they would work, just not shine ahead of you.  The horn would be fun, the people behind you would wonder who was honking at them.  What kind of car you got?
954808
It's probably illegal in all the states. That's a form of harassment.
336922
YES, IT IS LEGAL, provided it does not cause some form of interference (like a throw hitting it).\n\nThere is no prohibition in the Official Rules against carrying the bat.\n\nSome leagues may have local rules against it, and I know some softball codes forbid it.  However, there is nothing prohibiting taking the bat with you under the Offical Rules of Baseball...
931686
You can research that answer yourself by typing "radar detector illegal" (no quotes) into your search engine, just as I did a few moments ago. I found the below passage, but not sure how current the information is:\n\n"Q: Are radar detectors legal?\nA: Yes! A radar detector is completely legal to use in non-commercial vehicles in 49 states. Virginia and Washington DC are the only places in the United States that currently ban radar detectors. Radar detector use in commercial vehicles has been prohibited in the U.S. since 1995 and radar detectors are also illegal in most Canadian provinces. We do not track detector regulations in other countries."
834577
According to UK law, exhaust silencers should be clearly marked 'For road use' -  any others are probably illegal.  But a lot of motorcyclists, especially teenagers on 'powered roller skates',  buy noisy, illegal 'cans' and put them on their machines because in their minds noise equals power. \nThey are deluded, of course.   In any case, a quiet machine that can accelerate swiftly and smoothly will _always_ be more impressive (and acceptable) than Joe Bloggs on his 250 cc machine sounding like an Isle of Man entrant (but actually creeping along!).  Fortunately,  there are definitely fewer really loud machines on the roads these days. And for those who say that noisy machines help the rider to be noted, well that is not really true since the noise  _follows_ , not _precedes_  the rider....  Lights, bright clothing and sticking to speed limits is the way to avoid an accident - not noise.
1023138
Yes it is illegal but angry people with guns don't usually care about the law. I have been in your shoes and the man is in jail for now. In Vermont we have UMBRELLA which helps women like us find a safe place and other things that they need. They even went to court with me to keep him from trying to hurt me. Look in the yellow pages where you are for battered womens help or Legal Aid. Be careful and please stay safe. There is help out there please look into it. Thank you
100479
If you're undeage it is. It's also illegal to drink while driving. And it's illegal to drink in many public places (such as a state park).
807222
Might be neither if intended for racing. There's a Horse Industry Board . . .\n\nI did a search of cases. Without my going too deeply into the question it seems to me that horses can be any of the above: pets, livestock or racing stock.\n\nThere's one case that dances around the issue without addresing it exactly: F.A, Schottroffe Trust v. Trenary, 10 Va. Cir. 21, 1986 WL 401735 (Va.Cir.Ct. 1986). But even that one is not too helpful; and no Virginia statute addresses the issue. Look for yourself at: http://leg1.state.va.us/000/src.htm\n\n\n10 Va. Cir. 21, 1986 WL 401735 (Va. Cir. Ct.)\n\nCircuit Court of Virginia, Warren County.\n\nF. A. Schottroffe Trust v. William C. Trenary, et al\n\nAT LAW NO. 7594.February 14, 1986.\n\n*1 In this case the plaintiff claims damages arising out of the trespass by the defendant's cattle on the land of the plaintiff in a "no fence" county. The Court is required to pass upon the sufficiency of Ground No. 4 of the grounds of defense setting forth the affirmative defenses of contributory negligence and unavoidable accident. Both parties have submitted authorites on those issues but the Court notes that the defendant has filed no pleading testing the sufficiency of that ground of defense and makes this ruling upon the assumption that the appropriate pleading will be filed to raise that issue.\n\nHenry H. Whiting, Judge.\n\nWarren County has declared the boundary lines of each tract of land as a lawful fence to cattle in Article 1, Section 4-1 of its Code and the effect of this is to make the owner of the animals liable for their trespasses under the provisions of Virginia Code Section 55-330, which Poindexter v. May, 98 Va. 143 , 148 (1900), says restores the common law rule "which requires the owner of animals to keep them on his own land." Tate v. Ogg, 170 Va. 95, 101 (1938), described the Poindexter holding as "...that while at common law the owner of domestic animals was required, at his own peril, to keep them on his own land, or within enclosures, the rule has been changed in Virginia, as to certain animals, including horses and cattle, by legislative action, except in those counties where a .no fence' law had been adopted under the provisions of the Code." (Emphasis added.) Tate held that turkeys were animals outside of the statutory "fence" exception to the common law, making the owner absolutely liable for their trespasses, id., at 104, but refused to grant an injunction because the trespasses were only occasional, not willful and the damages at most were of trivial and inconsequential nature, id., at 107. Minor on Real Property (Ribble's Ed.), Section 122 at page 163, cites the common law rule, including Poindexter v. May as one of his authorities as:\n\n[I]ndependently of statute, or agreement to that effect, there exists no obligation upon the owner of land to fence it in, in order to keep out trespassing persons or cattle, there being at common law an absolute obligation upon other persons to remain on their own lands or in the highways and public places, to keep their cattle there, by means of fences or otherwise. In other words, in the case of cattle and domestic animals, the common law placed the duty upon the owner of the animals to keep them upon his own land by fences or other means, and imposed no duty upon the owner of the other land to keep them out.\n\nThe Restatement of Torts echoes this same rule in Section 504 in the following language:\n\n*2 A possessor of livestock which intrude upon the land of another is liable for their intrusion and for any harm done while upon the land to its possessor or a member of his household although the possessor of the livestock exercised the utmost care to prevent them from intruding. ...The liability imposed by the rule stated in this section is based primarily upon possession of the straying livestock and not upon the quality of the possessor's conduct. The fact that he has
458778
Yes. The roads are goverment property, and a goverment officer (police) can set up a road block if they believe that it will prevent property damage, loss of live, or major injury. It's legal anywhere.
38637
Not only is it rude and disruptive in alot of places it is illegal now.  Where I am originally from on your third ticket for that they can confiscate your car.  When your car sterio is so loud I can hear it in my apartment from the road IT'S TOO LOUD!