Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Newly Posted No Firearms Building in Reston

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Herndon, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    77

    Post imported post

    FYI:

    I have been going to a Dr's office in the Parkway One MedicalBuilding right across from Reston Hospital for the last few weeks. Been going for Physical Therapy so I usually leave the firearm locked in the truck cause there is no place to put it during PT.

    Just today I saw for the first time a BIG sign on the entrance door.

    NO SMOKING

    NO FIREARMS

    NO WEAPONS

    I am pretty sure the sign is new because I would have surely noticed it before cause it is quite large. :what:

    So if you havebusiness in that building you would normallycarry for, it is now posted to say you are not allowed. :shock:

    Paul



  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    378

    Post imported post

    Sounds like you need a new physical therapist.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Louisa County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    821

    Post imported post

    Damn!!!

    My doctor is in that building.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    Glock27Bill wrote:
    Damn!!!

    My doctor is in that building.
    Talk to him about it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Louisa County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    821

    Post imported post

    Neplusultra wrote:
    Glock27Bill wrote:
    Damn!!!

    My doctor is in that building.
    Talk to him about it.
    I'm due for a physical. Maybe I'll gently bring up the subject of self-defense.

    I honestly have no idea where he stands on the subject, and he's been my doctor for 18 years.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lorton, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    77

    Post imported post

    The sign means nothing in VA. You have to be asked to leave and then refuse in VA before you are tresspasing.-Jay

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Louisa County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    821

    Post imported post

    Jason Rogers wrote:
    The sign means nothing in VA. You have to be asked to leave and then refuse in VA before you are tresspasing.-Jay
    I respect these signs as much as I expect others to respect my property and any No Trespassing sign I may care to display.

    Yes, I can tell someone to get off of my property if they ignore my sign, but I would strongly resent them ignoring it in the first place.

    I expect others to respect my property rights, and I do the same in return.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    Glock27Bill wrote:
    Jason Rogers wrote:
    The sign means nothing in VA. You have to be asked to leave and then refuse in VA before you are tresspasing.-Jay
    I respect these signs as much as I expect others to respect my property and any No Trespassing sign I may care to display.

    Yes, I can tell someone to get off of my property if they ignore my sign, but I would strongly resent them ignoring it in the first place.

    I expect others to respect my property rights, and I do the same in return.
    I have to agree. As much as I hate to have to give up my right to self-defense just so I can go about my daily business, they also have a right over what goes on on their property. I think the best approach is to not be seen as trouble makers but law abiding, civil and respectful citizens. Then to work to convert them to the right way of looking at things :^). And also to sue the hell out of them if something should happen and they failed to provide adequate security.

    I really think the only reason they put those signs up is because they believe they will lose more customers by not doing so than they do by doing so. Once attitudes change, and they are changing, this also will change. IMO.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Jason Rogers wrote:
    The sign means nothing in VA. You have to be asked to leave and then refuse in VA before you are tresspasing.-Jay
    Not true. This is a summation of the legalrealities if you care to ignore the property owner's posted wishes and carry; but it doesn't mean the sign meansnothing.

    The sign means the owner/agent does not want firearms. It means if you carry knowingly anyway, you are violating theirwishes.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    In regards to property rights.... Your home is your personal property and your expectation of privacy and property rights are much higher. Although this is a private business - they are in fact, open to the public.

    While I'm sure the courts will disagree with me on this one, I do not believe a privateenterprise which openly solicites for business from the general public has the right to violate my civil rights. If I really can't avoid going into such places, I go CC. That's my tact.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    A "No Firearms" sign is very different from a "No Trespassing" sign. For example, some states have castle doctrine laws that enable private property owners to post and enforce "No trespassing -- violators will be shot!", at least in the immediate vicinity of their residence. I think we would all agree that violating a policy at a place where you are otherwise permitted does not warrant the same level of response.

    Just for the sake of debate, how would everyone here feel about a medical center that posted "No [insert race here] people allowed." Is this their right as property owners, or does it cross a line somewhere?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    Just for the sake of debate, how would everyone here feel about a medical center that posted "No [insert race here] people allowed." Is this their right as property owners, or does it cross a line somewhere?
    Your hypothetical example is a bit facetious, but does make the point. Businesses, although private enterprises, are subject to legal action if they violate their employee's, or customer'scivil rights. Discrimination cases are typical examples. I think the problem here is that the general public does not see RKBA as a civil rights issue.

    Eventually,one of these no-gun businesses are going toloose their @$$ in a civil suite brought forth bysome widowed and orphaned family of an otherwisepracticing gun owner who complied with an unconstitutional administrative policy. Sad,butI think that is what it will take toputRKBA on par with other civil rights in this arena.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Armed wrote:
    marshaul wrote:
    Just for the sake of debate, how would everyone here feel about a medical center that posted "No [insert race here] people allowed." Is this their right as property owners, or does it cross a line somewhere?
    Your hypothetical example is a bit facetious, but does make the point.¬* Businesses, although private enterprises, are subject to legal action if they violate their employee's, or customer's¬*civil rights.¬* Discrimination cases are typical examples.¬* I think the problem here is that the general public does not see RKBA as a civil rights issue.¬*

    Eventually,¬*one of these no-gun businesses are going to¬*loose their @$$ in a civil suite brought forth by¬*some widowed and orphaned family of an otherwise¬*practicing gun owner who complied with an unconstitutional administrative policy.¬* Sad,¬*but¬*I think that is what it will take to¬*put¬*RKBA on par with other civil rights in this arena.¬*
    I agree with you completely. That's the reason I always post stuff like this thread:
    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum65/15080-1.html

    I think that's exactly why it's important to drop the excessive partisanship and focus on RKBA as a civil rights issue. This is the only way we can gain the societal acceptance we here at OCDO desire.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Louisa County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    821

    Post imported post

    Armed wrote:
    In regards to property rights.... Your home is your personal property and your expectation of privacy and property rights are much higher. Although this is a private business - they are in fact, open to the public.

    While I'm sure the courts will disagree with me on this one, I do not believe a privateenterprise which openly solicites for business from the general public has the right to violate my civil rights. If I really can't avoid going into such places, I go CC. That's my tact.
    And this is where we mostly agree, Armed.

    I have always viewed these restriction as a violation of my constitutional/civil rights, and agree with the 'protected class' parallels others have drawn here.

    Our history is full of fear tactics used by others to restrict the rights of those that are not "like me."

    Businesses who purpote to restrict us based upon safety are repeating the same irrational bigotry of the past.

    While I will obey their questionable wishes, I would also contribute to the defense of someone who engages in acts of civil disobedience.

Posting Permissions

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