Funny and Weird Virginia Laws

racoon hunting virginia

I was inspired to go look through the Virginia laws the other day and I found some pretty surprising stuff. What do raccoons and oral sex have in common? Well, they are all part of the Virginia code in ways that you probably wouldn’t guess.

While searching, I also discovered that a lot of the weird laws we’d heard about actually weren’t true. Apparently, it is legal to have sex in positions other than “missionary” and you can drive a car while barefoot in Virginia.

But, what about those weird things that are still illegal in Virginia? You can find out after the break…

So, apparently, Sunday isn’t just a day of rest for humans, it is also a day of rest for animals. Well, all animals except those pesky raccoons which are huntable until 2AM on Sunday morning.

To hunt or kill any wild bird or wild animal, including any nuisance species, with a gun, firearm or other weapon on Sunday, which is hereby declared a rest day for all species of wild bird and wild animal life, except raccoons, which may be hunted until 2:00 a.m. on Sunday mornings. [ref]

Premarital sex? Ya, that’s illegal.

Any person, not being married, who voluntarily shall have sexual intercourse with any other person, shall be guilty of fornication, punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor. [ref]

The wording for this one is so bad. I think I’m going to start using “carnally knows” to replace any action verb in the future. Anyway, oral sex (both giving and receiving) is illegal in Virginia. Also, what is a brute animal? Is that different than a nice animal?

If any person carnally knows in any manner any brute animal, or carnally knows any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth, or voluntarily submits to such carnal knowledge, he or she shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. [ref]

I think I found all the weird ones. Let me know if I missed any. We will publish weird Charlottesville laws in the near future!

Popularity: 27% [?]

Tagged as: , , , , , ,

70 Responses to “Funny and Weird Virginia Laws”

  1. 13 May 2008 at 8:06 amStreet said:

    heh…I’m pretty sure I posted some of these in one of the free-for-alls. :P

  2. 13 May 2008 at 8:08 amThor said:

    Oh, sorry Street! Where did you do it?

  3. 13 May 2008 at 8:10 amStreet said:

    I have no freakin’ clue, and I’m not about to go searching through all the comments in every Free-For-All. I haven’t had that much coffee yet. :)

  4. 13 May 2008 at 8:17 amStreet said:

    Scratch that. I guess I have had enough coffee. I found it here.

  5. 13 May 2008 at 8:17 amFloozy said:

    This is not a weird law, but it may save you a ticket. Some friends of mine were recently pulled over for failing to observe the ‘Move Over’ law, tediously detailed below. I had never heard of it…. along with 71% of the rest of Virginia so kudos to the marketing genius they chose for that auspicious campaign of public enlightenment.

    Virginia Code 46.2-921.1
    The driver of any motor vehicle, upon approaching a stationary emergency vehicle, as defined in § 46.2-920, that is displaying a flashing, blinking, or alternating emergency light or lights as provided in §§ 46.2-1022, 46.2-1023, and 46.2-1024, shall (i) on a highway having at least four lanes, at least two of which are intended for traffic proceeding as the approaching vehicle, proceed with caution and, if reasonable, with due regard for safety and traffic conditions, yield the right-of-way by making a lane change into a lane not adjacent to that occupied by the stationary emergency vehicle or (ii) if changing lanes would be unreasonable or unsafe, proceed with due caution and maintain a safe speed for highway conditions.

    Violation of any provision of this section shall constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor. If the violation resulted in damage to property of another person, the court may, in addition, order the suspension of the driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle for not more than one year. If the violation resulted in injury to another person, the court may, in addition to any other penalty imposed, order the suspension of the driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle for not more than two years. If the violation resulted in the death of another person, the court may, in addition to any other penalty imposed, order the suspension of the driver’s privilege to operate a motor vehicle for two years.

  6. 13 May 2008 at 8:21 amorchid said:

    @5 we got that one in florida a few years ago; i assumed we didn’t here because i have NEVER seen anyone move over. thanks.

  7. 13 May 2008 at 8:38 amecho said:

    @5: I’m pretty sure that law was enacted in 2006. I remember hearing about it on the radio as I was driving on I-81.

    In Virginia, it is illegal to have sex with the lights on.

  8. 13 May 2008 at 8:44 amStreet said:

    Driving while not wearing shoes is prohibited.
    Police radar detectors are illegal.
    Citizens must honk their horn while passing other cars.
    Children are not to go trick-or-treating on Halloween.
    It is illegal to tickle women.

    - Culpeper - No one may wash a mule on the sidewalk.
    - Norfolk - Spitting on a sea gull is not tolerated.
    - Prince William County - No person may keep a skunk as a pet.

  9. 13 May 2008 at 8:51 amThor said:

    Street & Echo, I looked for a lot of those weird ones and I couldn’t find the references for them, if you guys find otherwise let me know.

  10. 13 May 2008 at 8:52 amFloozy said:

    I think the skunk thing is statewide which is sad… they are legal in Florida and are great pets…. which is very fortunate since you lose all your friends so Stripey has to live up to expectations.

  11. 13 May 2008 at 8:58 amecho said:

    I’ll see what I can find, but whenever I search for weird Virginia laws, it brings me back to this page. Apparently we have become an authority on the Virginia legal system.

  12. 13 May 2008 at 9:02 amLu Sid said:

    I should so be in jail…cause I, uh, kill animals on Sunday ALL THE TIME!

  13. 13 May 2008 at 9:03 amLu Sid said:

    Floozy, did you really just say skunks make great pets?!

  14. 13 May 2008 at 9:04 amThatGrrl said:

    Thor, a lot of those are probably unconstitutional, but still on the books. In large part, whatever consenting adults want to do with each other behind closed doors (married or not) is their business. Unconstitutional laws have a tendency to remain on the books until there is a specific court case speaking to that law (as opposed to a U.S. Supreme Court decision striking an almost identical law from another state). They do make for funny reading, though!

    BTW, some of the “laws” you are looking for might actually be regulations; part of the Virginia Administrative Code. Not saying that they are, but they could be.

  15. 13 May 2008 at 9:08 amStreet said:

    I just googled “dumb virgina laws” and found this video.

  16. 13 May 2008 at 9:09 amStreet said:

    @9 This page has more detailed explanations for a few of the laws we listed.

  17. 13 May 2008 at 9:12 amThor said:

    Street, I don’t think all of those are part of the Virginia Code.

  18. 13 May 2008 at 9:14 amecho said:

    I like how almost every site regarding dumb Virginia laws lists “radar detectors are illegal.” I hate that law too.

  19. 13 May 2008 at 9:16 amStreet said:

    @17 Okies, I’ll do a little research. Back in two shakes of a lambs tail.

  20. 13 May 2008 at 9:17 amCaroline said:

    floozy, I guess we broke that law….heehee.

  21. 13 May 2008 at 9:22 amStreet said:

    § 18.2-322. Expectorating in public places.

    No person shall spit, expectorate, or deposit any sputum, saliva, mucus, or any form of saliva or sputum upon the floor, stairways, or upon any part of any public building or place where the public assemble, or upon the floor of any part of any public conveyance, or upon any sidewalk abutting on any public street, alley or lane of any town or city.

    Any person violating any provision of this section shall be guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor.

    (Code 1950, § 32-69; 1975, cc. 14, 15.)

    /You’re a sputum.

  22. 13 May 2008 at 9:26 amStreet said:

    This references the driving with no shoes on law.

  23. 13 May 2008 at 9:33 amFloozy said:

    Caroline… Good morning Your Royal Frootiness :)

  24. 13 May 2008 at 9:43 amStreet said:

    Ye godz, legalese is a mind boggling, confusing jargon. I keep having to modify my search terms. Thor, I would have to agree with you that some are probably not in the code as such, but it is interesting to peruse the laws nevertheless.

    /make that 1 million shakes of a lambs tail.

  25. 13 May 2008 at 9:52 amorchid said:

    how many of those laws did oy break by carnally knowing live minks?

    it’s illegal in charlottesville for an adult to wear a mask except on halloween. (found this out AFTER my ex & i walked our dog dressed as batman & spiderman.)

    why in the world would it be illegal to drive barefoot?

    did you see that mrs. loving (as in loving v. virginia) died? she stayed out of the public eye for the 41 years since winning the case that struck down anti-miscegenation laws, except last year when she made a statement condemning anti-gay marriage amendments. good for her!

  26. 13 May 2008 at 9:54 amStreet said:

    This law could be construed to reference the “patting someones bottom” law. Look at rule 6-a.

    /more research results this afternoon, unless I am attacked by a beer.

  27. 13 May 2008 at 10:36 amshenanigans said:

    It is NOT illegal to drive barefoot. Mythbusters told me so. And the link Street provides @ 22 is for motorcyclists I believe. And everybody knows you’re supposed to yield to flashing emergency vehicles. Uh derr.

  28. 13 May 2008 at 10:50 amorchid said:

    “everybody knows you’re supposed to yield to flashing emergency vehicles”

    1) yielding to STOPPED flashing emergency vehicles isn’t quite as obvious
    2) not people in miami.

  29. 13 May 2008 at 10:52 am434, baby! said:

    This one’s pretty funny…
    You may not engage in business on Sundays, with the exception of almost every industry.
    http://www.dumblaws.com/law/946

  30. 13 May 2008 at 10:56 amThor said:

    @29, that law was repealed in 2004.. i checked it :)

  31. 13 May 2008 at 10:59 amorchid said:

    @29 playing baseball used to be illegal on sundays, as did making spectators pay admission. to get around it, teams:
    -said they were working not playing
    -gave everyone free admission but forced them to buy programs
    -said they were having a concert or something, & the baseball was just the opening act

    /working & slacking at the same time

  32. 13 May 2008 at 11:01 amoy said:

    how many of those laws did oy break by carnally knowing live minks?

    All of them.

    Including the RADAR detector one.

    /you do NOT want to know. Trust me.

  33. 13 May 2008 at 11:41 am434, baby! said:

    How about the 75 year old law that prohibits the mixing of wine with spirits, effectively making sangria illegal?

  34. 13 May 2008 at 11:53 amDonk said:

    Yeah.. I just found out last night at Mas that they can’t make Sangria anymore?

    What gives?

  35. 13 May 2008 at 12:31 pmMr. Roboto said:

    @33 why don’t they just deliver the parts and let them mix it at the table?

  36. 13 May 2008 at 12:37 pmThatGrrl said:

    @34 That will change as of July 1 of this year, via SB 584 (approved as chapter 875 of the legislature for 2008). The laws have been amended to allow exceptions for sangria:
    http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?081+ful+CHAP0875

    /get yo’ fruit on!

  37. 13 May 2008 at 12:51 pm434, baby! said:

    @36 That’s awesome. However, the only catch is that the law still requires for the sangria to be mixed to order and prohibits the premixing of ingredients.
    Downside to that is that it’s always nice to have some time for the fruit and the wine to mix properly AND that a lot of restaurants may not be able to accommodate the process on a per order basis.
    Does anyone know if the law still allows for pre-soaking of the fruit in something other than wine?

  38. 13 May 2008 at 12:55 pmorchid said:

    i’m done reading things so i can’t be self-sufficient here, but if you had the fruit & wine premixed (even now), wouldn’t it be legal, & then you could throw in the alcohol at the last minute?

    /never had sangria but i think i might object to it too.

  39. 13 May 2008 at 1:04 pmThatGrrl said:

    @37 Dunno, but at least it would appear that you can mix the fruit and “spirits” ahead of time, even if you can’t add the wine any way other than to order. Or that’s how I’m reading it:

    A. No licensee or any agent or employee of such licensee shall:
    3. Sell wine to which spirits or alcohol, or both, have been added, otherwise than as required in the manufacture thereof under Board regulations, except that a mixed beverage licensee may (i) make sangria that contains brandy, triple sec, or other similar spirits and (ii) combine beer or spirits, or both, with wine pursuant to a patron’s order;

    I read that as allowing them to make the spirit/fruit stuff ahead of time, but you have to wait to add the wine, pursuant to a patron’s order. Who knows?

    @38 The part of the law that was preexisting (and is operative now) is everything up to the word “except.” In other words, no mixing ever. Period. Weird, huh?

  40. 13 May 2008 at 1:09 pmecho said:

    @39: Is anyone else as repulsed by the fact that the law will now allow us to mix beer and wine? Seriously, what good can come from that combination? And the fact that they throw “or both” after “beer or spirits” means you could conceivably make a drink with beer, liquor and wine. I’m sure everyone’s shocked to discover I enjoy a drink every now and then, but I cannot fathom any palatable combination of beer and wine or beer, liquor and wine.

  41. 13 May 2008 at 1:15 pm434, baby! said:

    Natty Ice + Jagermeister + Franzia… I think we’re up to something here…
    NOT

  42. 13 May 2008 at 1:18 pmThatGrrl said:

    Gross! Soooo not going to be experimenting with all the alcohols at the same time. Ick.

  43. 13 May 2008 at 1:22 pmparlie said:

    you can mix BL lime with jim beam and wild irish rose to get a drink i call “you just threw up on yourself.”

    it is not gud.

  44. 13 May 2008 at 1:26 pm434, baby! said:

    speaking of odd combinations… Patron has a tequila/coffee liqueur. Haven’t tried it yet, but heard that Ventana uses it in one of their specialty margaritas. Anyone had it?

  45. 13 May 2008 at 1:28 pmThatGrrl said:

    @44 Haven’t had that, but the Van Gogh coffee vodka is insanely good.

  46. 13 May 2008 at 1:30 pm434, baby! said:

    I had that chilled the other day… it WAS awesome

  47. 13 May 2008 at 1:41 pmshenanigans said:

    Beer, wine, and liquor drink? No prob. How about Bud Light, SoCo, OJ, Grenadine and some Sparkling Wine?

  48. 13 May 2008 at 1:44 pmecho said:

    @47: Did you just make that up?

  49. 13 May 2008 at 1:45 pmorchid said:

    greenberry’s is getting a liquor license…

  50. 13 May 2008 at 1:51 pmecho said:

    ‘nanigans, do you guys have Van Gogh? I want to try a White Russian with it.

  51. 13 May 2008 at 2:14 pmStanley said:

    Sake bombs are rice wine and beer among other things. I can envision the addition of liquor as non-detrimental (to the drink; your liver’s done-for, of course). Vodka, perhaps?

  52. 13 May 2008 at 2:39 pmDonk said:

    Sake is closer to beer than wine due to its’ fermentation process. In other words, ‘rice wine’ is a bit of a misnomer. This doesn’t really disqualify your statement any, but I do see it as a great opportunity to out-nazi Stanley.

    /Three Sheets is a great show.
    //Drinking made intellectual.

  53. 13 May 2008 at 2:41 pmStanley said:

    a great opportunity to out-nazi Stanley.

    I’ll drink to that (or anything, really).

  54. 13 May 2008 at 2:46 pmorchid said:

    aren’t rice wine & sake 2 separate things?

    sake bombs are vastly less disgusting than jager bombs.

  55. 13 May 2008 at 2:51 pmStanley said:

    54: Wikipedia suggests that Sake is a subset of the broader category Rice Wine, in addition to confirming Donk’s pwnage from #52

  56. 13 May 2008 at 3:05 pmDonk said:

    Yep. When Three Sheets went to Japan, they basically did an entire show on Sake. It was pretty awesome. There are several different methods to brew it and a lot of variables within the process to get very different outcomes. I can’t offer enough specifics right now to make this post worth a damn, but I would really highly recommend that show to all of you. It’s on MOJOHD.

  57. 13 May 2008 at 3:13 pm434, baby! said:

    The Box makes delicious Sake Bombs, they almost taste like Mimosas. I used to love Jager bombs, but I would lose all control of my actions. So I stopped drinking Jager bombs and stated doing tequila, which also makes me lose control of my actions, but I feel great the next day.

  58. 13 May 2008 at 4:36 pmCRAZY MOMMA said:

    My favorite VA law: 18.2-90 “….any person in the daytime breaks and enters….. a dwelling house or an adjoining, occupied outhouse…..” YIKES! and who would do that?

  59. 13 May 2008 at 4:50 pmThatGrrl said:

    @58 I’m pretty sure they don’t mean “outhouse” in the sense that you’re thinking. It’s a legal term for a building smaller or subordinate to the main dwelling on a piece of property. Sure, some of them house the potty room, but a shed would also be an outhouse. Stupid laws. Nothing is ever as clear as it should be.

  60. 13 May 2008 at 11:43 pmscoriole said:

    i’ve been told that in some town to the west (in virginia), a woman can only drive down main street if a male family member is walking in front of her.

  61. 14 May 2008 at 1:25 amorchid said:

    @57 ah, the problem therein is that mimosas are gross.

  62. 14 May 2008 at 1:45 amscoriole said:

    (@60 i had to think a hard minute so i didn’t say “male member of her family”, cause sheesh! i can only imagine)…
    @61: how do you feel about bellinis?

  63. 14 May 2008 at 9:17 amCRAZY MOMMA said:

    been campaigning to change “outhouse” to “outbuilding.” Webster’s recognizes the difference. Black’s Law dictionary shows the labels as interchangeable. Now don’t get me started on comma placement.

  64. 14 May 2008 at 9:23 amorchid said:

    @62 i’ve never had one but i imagine they’re gross as well. that’s one of brunch’s (many) problems, that you’re supposed to get drunk but the drinks are gross.

  65. 14 May 2008 at 9:28 amStreet said:

    Some of our fine laws make as much sense as a 2-story outhouse.

  66. […] we may think that a culturally superior Charlottesville doesn’t face the strange laws of our Virginian relatives, but the truth hurts.  This time it’s about Halloween, slugs and pool […]

  67. 31 May 2008 at 12:12 pmBlahblah said:

    Both the the laws concerning oral sex and pre-marital sex have been struck down (as in the arent illegal any more). One was struck down in 2003, the other in 2005. They were funny, stupid laws, but they arent laws any more. i guess thats why it’s important to check the date on whatever article you are reading.

  68. 30 Jun 2008 at 3:36 pm434, baby! said:

    Just an update on the sangria laws… seems like, as of tomorrow, it will be legal for licensed establishments to make and sell sangria:
    http://www.richmondsunlight.com/bill/2008/hb1269/fulltext/
    Highlights in yellow towards the bottom of the page

  69. 30 Jun 2008 at 4:38 pmmc said:

    excellent summertime news, 434!

  70. […] is Now Legal -434, baby! pointed this out to us yesterday. Virginia legislators did away with this obscure law that prohibited restaurants from serving […]

Leave a Reply