Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Firearms Policy on Corps of Engineers Controled Lands

  1. #1
    Activist Member Wolf_shadow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Accomac, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,213

    Question Firearms Policy on Corps of Engineers Controled Lands

    Will this ruling affect property in Virginia?

    Ruling by the United States District Court for the District of Idaho stops Army Corps of Engineers from enforcing no guns policy on Corps controlled lands.

    On 10 January, 2014, Judge B. Lynn Winmill of the United States District Court for the District of Idaho, issued a preliminary injunction against the Army Corps of Engineers to prevent enforcement of the Corps’ rules banning guns on the properties that it manages.

    Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2014/10/cour...#ixzz3GasfbzDZ
    Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
    Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

    The ruling is written in clear language. It references the Georgia case, where the judge has refused to grant an injunction. The Georgia judge cited the Nordyke case from the Ninth Circuit, but ignored the Peruta decision, also from the Ninth Circuit. Judge Winmill writes that he falls under the Ninth Circuit, and must follow Peruta.
    The Court must ask first whether the Corps’ regulation burdens conduct protected by the Second Amendment. It does. The Second Amendment protects the right to carry a firearm for self-defense purposes. Heller, 554 U.S. at 628 (stating that “the inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right”). That right extends outside the home. Peruta, 742 F.3d at 1166 (holding that “the right to bear arms includes the right to carry an operable firearm outside the home for the lawful purpose of self-defense”).
    Yes I carry a Bible and a Gun, your point.
    Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos (meaning: "A defence of liberty against tyrants")
    Benjamin Franklin said, "A government that does not trust it's citizens with guns is a government that should not be trusted."



  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    The regulation banning the use of handguns on Corps’ property by law-abiding citizens for self-defense purposes violates the Second Amendment…. The plaintiffs are therefore entitled to a declaratory judgment that 36 C.F.R. § 327.13 violates the Second Amendment, and an injunction enjoining its enforcement in Idaho. The injunction is limited to Idaho because its scope is dictated by the allegations of the two named plaintiffs — Elizabeth Morris and Alan Baker.
    It will be interesting to see what the Ninth Circuit will do with the inevitable appeal. Thanks to Charles Nichols for the pointer.

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...40#post2103140
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf_shadow View Post
    Will this ruling affect property in Virginia?
    It will.

    But not for years.

    Not even if someone stepped up to be the test case in Virginia.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  4. #4
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202
    Does the ruling have any affect outside of that district? Here's the what if, the plaintiffs go to Army Corps of Engineers land outside of that district, isn't a federal judges court order still valid outside their district when it comes to enforcing their order? Does engaging in conduct prohibited by a court order become legitimate if You just stepped foot outside of that circuit?

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    The final paragraph of the decision makes clear the legal logic strictly limiting the effect of the decision to Idaho. The Court clearly contemplated its wider application but was unable to do so for the structure of the case/documents.
    See Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky, 586 F.3d 1109, 1140 (9th Cir. 2009) (holding that “[t]he district court abused its discretion in enjoining the rules themselves as opposed to enjoining their enforcement as to the plaintiffs before him”). Morris and Baker allege that they use Corps’ campgrounds in Idaho, see Declarations of Morris and Baker (Dkt. Nos. 9 & 10), and so the Court’s injunction will be limited to enjoining enforcement on Corps’ property in Idaho. See Meinhold v. U.S. Dept. of Defense, 34 F.3d 1469 (9 th Cir. Memorandum Decision -- 9
    Last edited by Nightmare; 10-19-2014 at 10:56 AM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    It will.
    But not for years.
    Not even if someone stepped up to be the test case in Virginia.
    Maybe someone from Ol' Virginia needs to do just that? There's already a civil suit in Georgia against the Corps of Engineers in the same matter. I can't think of anything wrong with forcing the Corps to spend massive amounts of money in every state defending a suit that they could easily just change ACoE rules about.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Maybe someone from Ol' Virginia needs to do just that? There's already a civil suit in Georgia against the Corps of Engineers in the same matter. I can't think of anything wrong with forcing the Corps to spend massive amounts of money in every state defending a suit that they could easily just change ACoE rules about.
    Sounds like you actually expect the gubermant to be logical or god forbid, intelligent.

    Never going to happen. That possibility was destroyed by the last 6 years of NObama Fascist stupidity under the command of Holder and his fellow idiots in the cabinet.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Maybe someone from Ol' Virginia needs to do just that? There's already a civil suit in Georgia against the Corps of Engineers in the same matter. I can't think of anything wrong with forcing the Corps to spend massive amounts of money in every state defending a suit that they could easily just change ACoE rules about.
    I'll do it if you bankroll me. (That could include finding an organization willing to put up the necessary funds.)

    And in case you have forgotten, your plan involves the CoE spending "massive amounts" of your money, while still maintaining their regular operational budget. Few folks outside some oil-producing countries in the Middle East have the wherewithall to outspend the government of even a small country.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  9. #9
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202
    I see, the ruling does not even apply throughout the courts own jurisdiction.

    The court applied the president correctly but balked at the full political implications of enforcement of the remedy.

  10. #10
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by lockman View Post
    I see, the ruling does not even apply throughout the courts own jurisdiction.

    The court applied the president correctly but balked at the full political implications of enforcement of the remedy.
    Don't you mean precedent?
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  11. #11
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Firearms Policy on Corps of Engineers Controled Lands

    I must turn off this automatic spelling stuff. I type one thing only to find it has been changed. Just yesterday it kept changing a word to a name in my contact list. IOS 8
    Last edited by lockman; 10-19-2014 at 04:33 PM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Maybe someone from Ol' Virginia needs to do just that? There's already a civil suit in Georgia against the Corps of Engineers in the same matter. I can't think of anything wrong with forcing the Corps to spend massive amounts of money in every state defending a suit that they could easily just change ACoE rules about.
    Quote Originally Posted by va_tazdad View Post
    Sounds like you actually expect the gubermant to be logical or god forbid, intelligent.

    Never going to happen. That possibility was destroyed by the last 6 years of NObama Fascist stupidity under the command of Holder and his fellow idiots in the cabinet.
    You do realize that Morris v Corps of Engineers was filed in 2013 and Georgia Carry v Corps of Engineers was filed this year, 2014, right? Both are well past the date of President Obama's 2008 election.

    I'm surprised no one (or no organization) is willing to risk a modest amount of money to file as any monies would be returned as part of a successful suit or settlement.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Quote Originally Posted by lockman View Post
    I see, the ruling does not even apply throughout the courts own jurisdiction.
    The court applied the precedent correctly but balked at the full political implications of enforcement of the remedy.
    The judgment only covers Idaho, as both plaintiffs stated in their filing that they lived and used Corps land in that state alone, specifically at Dworshak Dam and surrounding areas. Morris and Baker wrote to the Corps commander for the area to obtain permission to carry a functional firearm on recreational land they intended to visit and did not receive a reply. Under Corps rules, private carry of guns either concealed, in vehicles, or inside temporary structures such as tents on water project areas is prohibited unless the district commander gives explicit permission. Denied their right to self-defense, the two filed suit seeking a halt to the practice.

    Every journey begins with a single step. The journey's begun.

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    You do realize that Morris v Corps of Engineers was filed in 2013 and Georgia Carry v Corps of Engineers was filed this year, 2014, right? Both are well past the date of President Obama's 2008 election.

    I'm surprised no one (or no organization) is willing to risk a modest amount of money to file as any monies would be returned as part of a successful suit or settlement.
    You do realize that the amount of money necessary to file and prosecute a lawsuit is only a part of the expense of doing so. Time, effort, and emotional strain/drain need to be factored in.

    And again, I repeat my offer to become the test case in Virginia, under the same provisos as earlier noted. Will you step up?

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  15. #15
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Georgia Carry v Corps of Engineers; we Georgians are already doing our part.
    And realistically, I'm sure you realize that I couldn't file suit in Virginia as I lack standing.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 10-19-2014 at 11:53 PM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    reported
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  17. #17
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Captain...There be SPAM



  18. #18
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,614
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    Captain...There be SPAM


    And there was spam, but of the new smoky variety

    Looks different, tastes the same.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Georgia Carry v Corps of Engineers; we Georgians are already doing our part.
    And realistically, I'm sure you realize that I couldn't file suit in Virginia as I lack standing.
    And surely you realize that my offer was for me, personally, a Virginia resident, to be the test case. Surely you realize that means I would be the one filing the suit and going to court as the plaintiff. Surely you realize that all you are being asked to do is bankroll (grubstake) the endeavor.

    Your obfuscation is more blatant and ineffective than another non-Virginian who comes here to discuss Virginia-specific issues. (Everyone is welcome to discuss, but it does help to focus on Virginia and the legal system and its constraints here as opposed to wherever else one might be.)

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  20. #20
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    I think you'd do better begging for money on the street corner, honestly. All my money's tied up in cash at the moment.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •