• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Firearms Policy on Corps of Engineers Controled Lands

Wolf_shadow

Activist Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
1,215
Location
Accomac, Virginia, USA
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/cou...s-ban-on-guns-unconstitutional/#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”).
 

lockman

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
1,193
Location
Elgin, Illinois, USA
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?
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
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.
 

va_tazdad

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
1,162
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
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.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
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.
 

lockman

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
1,193
Location
Elgin, Illinois, USA
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.
 

lockman

State Researcher
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
1,193
Location
Elgin, Illinois, USA
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:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
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.
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.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
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.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
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.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
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:

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Captain...There be SPAM
:lol::lol:

images
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
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.
 
Top