• 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.

Va Tech Gun Ban

vtme_grad98

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
385
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, ,
imported post

I saw this in the latest VCDL Alert.

**************************************************

5. VT now has a blanket firearms ban

**************************************************



Member Dave Yates researched, and found the new rule text. The text

doesn't mention any punishment for visitors who fail to comply with

removal request, but most likely it would be a trespass charge.



If somehow the University discovers that a permit holder is carrying

a gun (that should only happen if the permit holder is carelessness

or stupid), the permit holder will be asked to remove the gun from

the campus immediately. Failure to do so may lead to legal and/or

disciplinary action.



The areas where the ban is in effect is given in the wording of the

below. Carry in parking lots, sidewalks, grassed areas, etc. look to

be allowed.



The applicable University text reads (in part):



--



2.2 Prohibition of Weapons The university employees, students, and

volunteers, or any visitor or other third party attending a sporting,

entertainment, or educational event, or visiting an academic or

administrative office building or residence hall, are further

prohibited from carrying, maintaining, or storing a firearm or weapon

on any university facility, even if the owner has a valid permit,

when it is not required by the individual's job, or in accordance

with the relevant University Student Life Policies.



Any such individual who is reported or discovered to possess a

firearm or weapon on university property will be asked to remove it

immediately. Failure to comply may result in a student judicial

referral and/or arrest, or an employee disciplinary action and/or

arrest.
Can they even back this up at all? Being state property, at what point could they claim a trespassing charge, if at all? The campus police can ask me to remove my firearm all day long, but is there any point where they have legal standing to demand that I leave with it?
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

The proprietor's agent is frequently necessary to charge trespassing.

Trespassing law needs to be examined as carefully as gun law. IANAL but often constructive notice must be made before trespassing can be charged and a sign don't cut it - often. It varies by jurisdiction.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth NRA KMA$$
 

taurusfan

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
307
Location
Richmond, ,
imported post

It's amazing to read a law like this. People intent on mass homicide break multiple laws.

Gun bans create killing zones for homicidal maniacs.

I say conceal carry everywhere you possibly can, all the time.

People should definitely be carrying at VTech with this lame law they have.

If guns are going to be banned, then it has to be total, with guards and metal detectors at all entrances to a building.
 

CPerdue

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
235
Location
Salem, ,
imported post

Total freaken BS. There is a more complete analysis on the GMU thread, but I still don't know if they can actually do something to an ordinary person standing at a campus bus stop with an AK over their shoulder.
 

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
imported post

Why not combine the two issues? It appears that VT is simply amending its operating procedure to the extent permitted by law (particularly the AG Opinion). GMU, on the other hand, seeks to promulgate a new regulation (administrative law) which has more "teeth" (similar to VCU). A better way would be to approach the General Assembly for clarification on the statutory authorities the colleges are using to publish regulations and how it conflicts with other statutory provisions (e.g. preemption). If you attempt to fight GMU here and VT there, you are in for a long series of battles with every university/college as they seek to have their own regulatory prohibitions. In other words, to use a morbid metaphor, strangle this baby in the crib.
 

638Fitta

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
64
Location
Spotsylvania, Virginia, USA
imported post

Has anyone received a response from a GMU (to Mr Hubble)email provided by VCDL? I did. I cut and pasted it below




Please be advised that educational institutions of the Commonwealth are exempt from the Administrative Process Act pursuant to 2.2-4002.A.6. of the Code of Virginia. University regulations are instead adopted in conformity with the Virginia Register Act, 2.2-4100, et seq., of the Code of Virginia.

No public hearing is required. The proposed regulation appeared in the August 6th Virginia Register of Regulations in conformity with the Virginia Register Act.
 

SIGguy229

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
349
Location
Stafford, VA, , Afghanistan
imported post

I did...



I sent him a reply back asking him why he didn't want any public comment or other views on the subject. I also asked him what did he need to hide by not extending the comment period.



Still waiting for an answer
 

638Fitta

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
64
Location
Spotsylvania, Virginia, USA
imported post

[size=> I just highlighted, enlarged, put in bold type, and sent back.......][/size]

> The General Assembly has reserved control of firearms to itself,

> with the

> only exceptions being for local control of hunting and discharge of

> firearms. There is NO law that authorizes the University to regulate

> firearms, especially for students and visitors.

[size=> ][/size]
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

taurusfan wrote:
It's amazing to read a law like this. People intent on mass homicide break multiple laws.

Gun bans create killing zones for homicidal maniacs.

I say conceal carry everywhere you possibly can, all the time.

People should definitely be carrying at VTech with this lame law they have.

If guns are going to be banned, then it has to be total, with guards and metal detectors at all entrances to a building.

This kind of law has been in force someplace else since 1976 and it has proved not to work.

DC criminals are better armed than the police!
 

UTOC-45-44

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,579
Location
Morgan, Utah, USA
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
taurusfan wrote:
It's amazing to read a law like this. People intent on mass homicide break multiple laws.

Gun bans create killing zones for homicidal maniacs.

I say conceal carry everywhere you possibly can, all the time.

People should definitely be carrying at VTech with this lame law they have.

If guns are going to be banned, then it has to be total, with guards and metal detectors at all entrances to a building.

This kind of law has been in force someplace else since 1976 and it has proved not to work.

DC criminals are better armed than the police!

That a LEO would "admit";):D to that is kinda shocking but speaketh the Truth. I respect that.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
SNIP DC criminals are better armed than the police!
He's just trying to lull us innocent, law-abiding citizens into complacency about militarized police. :p


I haven't seen ballistic shields, armored water-cannon, pepper foggers, sniper rifles, grenade launchers, etc. in criminal hands in DC. Its been quite a while since I've even heard of a sub-machine gun or machine pistol being confiscated, much less actually used by a criminal. (we need a smiley for "smug look")
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

Citizen wrote:
LEO 229 wrote:
SNIP DC criminals are better armed than the police!
He's just trying to lull us innocent, law-abiding citizens into complacency about militarized police. :p


I haven't seen ballistic shields, armored water-cannon, pepper foggers, sniper rifles, grenade launchers, etc. in criminal hands in DC. Its been quite a while since I've even heard of a sub-machine gun or machine pistol being confiscated, much less actually used by a criminal. (we need a smiley for "smug look")

OK.. I agree that we take away those items from the police. We need a fair playing field for everyone!!

When playing cops and robbers for real.. The robbers should have just as good a chance to kill the cops too.

Cops do not need any shields... it is their job to be shot at when attempting to stop an active shooter or be hit with rocks and bottles during a riot. They are getting paid to risk their life so let the people get their moneys worth.

Instead of using a water cannon or pepper foggerto clear a street filled with a huge riot damaging cars and property or setting fires to buildings... the copsshould either let it continue and allow the people go move alongor risk injuryuseing their hands to go arrest people.

Who really needs a sniper rifle. The cops should only use their handgun where they must get up close, under 25 yards, and take that head shot when someone has a hostage. Pick the best marksman so the hostage does not get hurt.

Grenade launchers??? Not sure how many police departments actually shoot grenades at people. Maybe you are viewing tear gas launchers... And that goes back to riot controlor even barricades in a building.

I say we abolish all law enforcement and go back to the days of the Wild Wild West...Just before they created US Marshals and Deputies to keep the peace and stop people from hurting others.

We have 90 guns for every 100 people according to the news.The people should just take the law into their own hands and defend themselves as they deem appropriate. Then we can have the Hatfields and McCoys again.

Law enforcement is out of control now with all their guns and gadgets!! The Citizens are feeling threatened.

Actually... Some other citizens are feeling threatened by people OCing so I think Citizens should not be allowed to have guns and gadgets either.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and rocks & sticks and the truth.


::Insert Disappointed Smile Face Here::
 

roscoe13

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
1,134
Location
Catlett, Virginia, USA
imported post

LEO 229 wrote:
Citizen wrote:
LEO 229 wrote:
SNIP DC criminals are better armed than the police!
He's just trying to lull us innocent, law-abiding citizens into complacency about militarized police. :p


I haven't seen ballistic shields, armored water-cannon, pepper foggers, sniper rifles, grenade launchers, etc. in criminal hands in DC. Its been quite a while since I've even heard of a sub-machine gun or machine pistol being confiscated, much less actually used by a criminal. (we need a smiley for "smug look")

OK.. I agree that we take away those items from the police. We need a fair playing field for everyone!!
He didn't suggest that, he merely pointed out that "DC criminals are better armed than the police!" is a bit of a stretch...
 

LEO 229

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
7,606
Location
USA
imported post

roscoe13 wrote:
LEO 229 wrote:
Citizen wrote:
LEO 229 wrote:
SNIP DC criminals are better armed than the police!
He's just trying to lull us innocent, law-abiding citizens into complacency about militarized police. :p


I haven't seen ballistic shields, armored water-cannon, pepper foggers, sniper rifles, grenade launchers, etc. in criminal hands in DC. Its been quite a while since I've even heard of a sub-machine gun or machine pistol being confiscated, much less actually used by a criminal. (we need a smiley for "smug look")

OK.. I agree that we take away those items from the police. We need a fair playing field for everyone!!
He didn't suggest that, he merely pointed out that "DC criminals are better armed than the police!" is a bit of a stretch...
Stating the criminals are better armed was said as a joke in regards to the DC gun ban. Are they better armed?? Maybe they are. DC cannnot tell you for sure since they cannot catch a cold. :p

The topic of the police having unnecessary items has been discussed at length in several other threads.

The items mentioned here been mentioned before. Since they are being mentioned again.. I chose to agree that the police should not have them... :Sarcasm:
 
Top